Opinion
Case No. 2:15-CV-2366 JCM (GWF)
03-20-2017
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff(s), v. CLARENCE MOSES WILLIS, et al., Defendant(s).
ORDER
Presently before the court is defendant Clarence Willis's second motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (ECF No. 181).
As an initial matter, the court finds no response necessary and further finds the motion properly resolved without oral argument. See LR 78-1.
For the reasons set forth in the court's orders (ECF Nos. 114, 131), defendant's motion to dismiss will be denied. Moreover, defendant has failed to set forth any new circumstance or argument regarding subject matter jurisdiction or the lack thereof.
Further, the court reminds defendant that although he is pro se, he is nonetheless bound by the same rules of procedure that govern other litigants. See King v. Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987) ("Pro se litigants must follow the same rules of procedure that govern other litigants."); see also Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 54 (9th Cir. 1995) ("Although we construe pleadings liberally in their favor, pro se litigants are bound by the rules of procedure."); Jacobsen v. Filler, 790 F.2d 1362, 1364 (9th Cir. 1986) ("[P]ro se litigants in the ordinary civil case should not be treated more favorably than parties with attorneys of record."). As such, defendant shall ensure that all future filings comply with the applicable local and federal rules and is cautioned that future noncompliant filings will be stricken and may subject him to sanctions.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 181) be, and the same hereby is, DENIED.
DATED March 20, 2017.
/s/ James C . Mahan
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE