From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wright v. Indymac Bank, FSB

United States District Court, C.D. California
Oct 6, 2011
Case No. CV 11-06875 DDP (PJWx) (C.D. Cal. Oct. 6, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. CV 11-06875 DDP (PJWx).

October 6, 2011


ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS [docket number #8]


Presently before the court is Defendant One West Bank's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint. Because Plaintiff has not filed an opposition, the court GRANTS the motion.

Central District of California Local Rule 7-9 requires an opposing party to file an opposition to any motion at least twenty — one (21) days prior to the date designated for hearing the motion. C.D. CAL. L.R. 7-9. Additionally, Local Rule 7-12 provides that "[t]he failure to file any required paper, or the failure to file it within the deadline, may be deemed consent to the granting or denial of the motion." C.D. CAL. L.R. 7-12.

The hearing on Defendant's motion was set for October 17, 2011. Plaintiff's opposition was therefore due by September 26, 2011. As of the date of this Order, Plaintiff has not filed an opposition, or any other filing that could be construed as a request for a continuance. Accordingly, the court deems Plaintiff's failure to oppose as consent to granting the motion to dismiss, and GRANTS the motion.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Wright v. Indymac Bank, FSB

United States District Court, C.D. California
Oct 6, 2011
Case No. CV 11-06875 DDP (PJWx) (C.D. Cal. Oct. 6, 2011)
Case details for

Wright v. Indymac Bank, FSB

Case Details

Full title:EMAKO WRIGHT, Plaintiff, v. INDYMAC BANK, FSB; ONE WEST BANK, FSB…

Court:United States District Court, C.D. California

Date published: Oct 6, 2011

Citations

Case No. CV 11-06875 DDP (PJWx) (C.D. Cal. Oct. 6, 2011)