From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Crescitelli v. Bank of Am.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Apr 15, 2014
569 F. App'x 531 (9th Cir. 2014)

Opinion

No. 12-56920 D.C. No. 8:12-cv-00625-DOC-RNB

04-15-2014

LUIS M. CRESCITELLI; RYAN CALVO, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Defendant - Appellee.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

David O. Carter, District Judge, Presiding


Submitted April 10, 2014

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Pasadena, California

Before: FARRIS and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and FRIEDMAN, Senior District Judge.

The Honorable Paul L. Friedman, Senior District Judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, sitting by designation.
--------

Luis Crescitelli and Ryan Calbo (Plaintiffs) appeal a district court judgment entered pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) dismissing this diversity action against Bank of America after Plaintiffs failed to meet a court-ordered deadline for filing an amended complaint. We review the dismissal for an abuse of discretion, Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992), and affirm.

After removal, Bank of America filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Plaintiffs did not file an opposition to that motion. Rather than grant the motion outright, the district court instead dismissed the complaint without prejudice, giving Plaintiffs leave to file an amended complaint within thirteen days of its order. The order expressly warned that failure to file an amended complaint would result in dismissal with prejudice.

Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint two days after the deadline. The district court therefore did not abuse its discretion in dismissing this action with prejudice for failing to comply with its express order. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642-43 (9th Cir. 2002). Although Plaintiffs claim that a timely filing was submitted and then rejected by the clerk, the district judge correctly noted that the clerk's record belies that contention.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Crescitelli v. Bank of Am.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Apr 15, 2014
569 F. App'x 531 (9th Cir. 2014)
Case details for

Crescitelli v. Bank of Am.

Case Details

Full title:LUIS M. CRESCITELLI; RYAN CALVO, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. BANK OF…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Apr 15, 2014

Citations

569 F. App'x 531 (9th Cir. 2014)