Opinion
MEMORANDUM DECISION
ROBERT S. BARDWIL, Bankruptcy Judge
On July 21, 2009 Ilona and Gregorio Sampayan, the debtors herein, filed their Chapter 13 case. On October 5, 2009 the court conducted a continued hearing on First Federal Bank's ("First Federal") motion for relief from automatic stay. Following the hearing the court granted First Federal relief from stay by order entered October 6, 2009 (the "Relief From Stay Order"). On January 20, 2010 the debtors filed a Notice of Motion and Motion to Vacate Order, and Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support Thereof (the "Motion"). The Motion seeks to "vacate" the Relief From Stay Order. The debtors seek this relief on an ex parte basis without a hearing after notice to First Federal. For the reasons stated, the Motion will be denied.
The Motion is procedurally defective. The Motion is governed by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9014, and as such, the relief requested can only be granted after a hearing on notice to First Federal. Second, the Motion does not comply with Local Bankruptcy Rule 9014-1(c). Third, the notice, motion and memorandum of points and authorities are all filed as a single document contrary to Local Bankruptcy Rule 9014-1(d) and the court's Guidelines for the Preparation of Documents.
The court will turn to the merits of the Motion. The Motion requests that the court vacate the Relief From Stay Order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)2), as made applicable by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9024, asserting newly discovered evidence. However, neither the Motion, nor the attendant declarations, identify any newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time for a new trial under Rule 59(b). Accordingly, the debtors have not met their burden that relief from the Relief From Stay Order is warranted under Rule 60(b)(2).
For the reasons stated the Motion will be denied by separate order.