Chico v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
- Phyllis Hamilton
- 4:20-cv-01963
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Chico v. Wells Fargo Bank, Judge Hamilton ordered plaintiffs to explain their failure to oppose a dismissal motion.
Benigno G. Chico and Helen O. Chico were required to respond; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., and U.S. Bank, N.A., could file a reply if the plaintiffs opposed the motion.
What happened
In Chico v. Wells Fargo Bank, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., and U.S. Bank, N.A., moved to dismiss Benigno G. Chico and Helen O. Chico’s complaint. The plaintiffs’ deadline to oppose the motion passed without an opposition or statement that they did not oppose it.
The court ordered the plaintiffs to show why the case should not be dismissed with prejudice for failing to oppose the motion. They had seven days from the order’s filing to submit an opposition or a statement of non-opposition.
Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton warned that failing to comply could lead to dismissal for failure to pursue the case and failure to follow a court order. The order did not decide the defendants’ motion to dismiss.
The detailed version
- Chico v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. · No. 4:20-cv-01963
- Phyllis Hamilton
- Apr. 27, 2020
Background
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., and U.S. Bank, N.A., moved to dismiss the complaint filed by Benigno G. Chico and Helen O. Chico. The plaintiffs’ opposition was due April 10, 2020, but the court had not received either an opposition brief or a statement of non-opposition by the deadline.
The court also referred the parties to its Alternative Dispute Resolution Unit for a telephone conference. That conference occurred on April 13, 2020.
Order
The court ordered the plaintiffs to show cause—meaning to explain—why the action should not be dismissed with prejudice for failing to oppose the defendants’ motion. The plaintiffs were required to file and serve either an opposition or a statement of non-opposition within seven days after the order was filed. If they filed an opposition, the defendants could file a reply within seven days after the opposition was due.
The court warned that failing to comply on time would result in dismissal of the action for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward, and for failure to comply with a court order. This order did not rule on the merits of the defendants’ motion to dismiss; it set a deadline for the plaintiffs to respond to the court’s show-cause order.
Disposition
The court issued an order to show cause. It did not dismiss the action in this order. Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton signed the order on April 27, 2020.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.