Opinion
Case No.: 5:15-cv-01886-PSG
08-12-2015
GEORGE W. BEECHUM et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITIMORTGAGE, INC., et al., Defendants.
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
(Re: Docket No. 5)
Defendant CitiMortgage, Inc. moves to dismiss entirely and strike portions of the complaint of Plaintiffs George W. Beechum and Anne Marie Beechum.
See Docket No. 5.
The Beechums previously filed a nearly-identical complaint against the same Defendants, raising the same claims and requesting the same relief. In that case, Defendant NBS Default Services, LLC moved to dismiss. The Beechums did not oppose, and the court ordered the Beechums to show cause why dismissal for failure to prosecute was not warranted. The Beechums did nothing, so the court granted the motion to dismiss with leave to amend within 21 days. Having seen no amendment, both Defendants again moved to dismiss. At a hearing on the second motion to dismiss, George Beechum said that he had never received the court's first order dismissing his complaint. In light of this representation, and the Beechums' pro se status, the court granted the Beechums an additional seven days to submit an amended complaint. The Beechums never filed an amended complaint, however, and the court subsequently granted Defendants' motion to dismiss without leave to amend.
Both the current and prior complaints appear to be copied from a complaint in an unrelated case. See Huerta v. CitiMortgage, Inc., et al., E.D. Cal. Case No. 5:12-cv-01702-VAP. The Beechums' current and prior complaints differ only in that in their first complaint, they neglected to replace the names of the plaintiffs in the unrelated case with their own. In their second complaint, the Beechums corrected their names. Compare Beechum v. CitiMortgage, Inc., et al., Case No. 5:14-cv-03083-PSG, Docket No. 1 at 35:2 with Docket No. 1 at 35:2.
See Beechum v. CitiMortgage, Inc., et al., Case No. 5:14-cv-03083-PSG, Docket No. 1 at 24-34.
See id., Docket No. 10.
See id., Docket No. 17 at ¶¶ 17-18.
See id., Docket No. 22 at ¶¶ 21-23.
See id., Docket No. 23.
See id., Docket No. 27.
See id., Docket No. 27.
See id., Docket No. 30.
In the midst of the proceedings in their first case, the Beechums filed this second, near-identical case. CitiMortgage again moved to dismiss, and the Beechums again never opposed.
See Docket No. 1 at 24-34.
See Docket No. 5. --------
In the two cases, the Beechums have had multiple opportunities to amend their complaint. They have failed to oppose Defendants' motions to dismiss three times, and have presented the court with no basis to find that any further leave to amend would result in a complaint capable of surviving a motion to dismiss.
The motion to dismiss is GRANTED, this time without leave to amend.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 12, 2015
/s/_________
PAUL S. GREWAL
United States Magistrate Judge