Dace v. TD Bank/Target ( 2024 )

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 DACE, et al., 4 Plaintiffs, Case No.: 2:23-cv-01806-GMN-DJA 5 vs. 6 ORDER TD BANK/TARGET, 7 Defendant. 8 9 Pending before the Court is the Second Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 15), filed by TD 10 Bank/Target (“Defendant”). Magistrate Judge Albregts filed a Report and Recommendation 11 (“R&R”) (ECF No. 13) which recommended GRANTING Defendant’s First Motion to 12 Dismiss, (ECF No. 6), and dismissing Plaintiffs’ Complaint, (ECF No. 1), without prejudice 13 and with leave to amend. Plaintiffs failed to object to the R&R by the objection deadline of 14 April 24, 2024. On April 26, 2024, this Court adopted the R&R and gave Plaintiffs 21 days to 15 file an amended complaint. (See April 26, 2024, Order, ECF No. 14). Plaintiffs did not file an 16 amended complaint by the deadline. On August 21, 2024, Defendant filed the pending Motion 17 requesting the case be dismissed with prejudice for Plaintiffs’ failure to file an amended 18 complaint. Plaintiffs did not file a response to the pending Motion and Defendant filed a 19 Notice of Non-Opposition, (ECF No. 17), drawing the Court’s attention to Plaintiff’s failure to 20 respond. 21 On October 24, 2024, the Court deferred ruling on the Second Motion to Dismiss and 22 gave Plaintiffs until November 11, 2024, to file a response because the Court was uncertain 23 whether Plaintiffs had received the filings in this matter.1 A copy of the October 24, 2024, 24 25 1 It appears that the filings in this matter were being sent to Plaintiffs at the address listed on the docket: 6255 West Arby Avenue #184, Las Vegas, NV 89118. However, Plaintiff listed a different address in their Answer to 1 Order, (ECF No. 18), along with ECF Nos. 13–16 were both mailed and emailed to Plaintiffs at 2 the mailing address and email addresses listed in their Answer to Defendant’s First Motion to 3 Dismiss, (ECF No. 11). As of the date of this Order, Plaintiffs have failed to respond or file an 4 amended complaint. 5 “On its own, Plaintiff’s failure to file points and authorities in opposition to a motion 6 constitutes consent that the motion be granted.” Gonzalez v. Bank of America, N.A., No. 2:13- 7 cv-00460, 2013 WL 3877708, at *2 (D. Nev. July 24, 2013) (citing Local Rule 7-2(d)). 8 Moreover, the Court cautioned Plaintiffs that failure to file an amended complaint would result 9 in their case being dismissed with prejudice. (April 26, 2024, Order 2:6–9). As explained 10 above, no response or amended complaint was filed, and the deadline to do so has passed. 11 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s Second Motion to Dismiss, (ECF No. 12 15), is GRANTED and this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. 13 The Clerk of Court is kindly requested to close this case and mail a copy of this Order to 14 Plaintiffs at: 15 Philip and Luba Dace 16 7320 S. Rainbow Blvd. Ste 102 #184 17 Las Vegas, Nevada 89139 18 /// 19 /// 20 /// 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 25 Defendant’s First Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 11): 7320 S. Rainbow Blvd. Ste 102 #184, Las Vegas, NV 89139. Plaintiffs also listed email addresses in their Answer: Philip.dace@gmail.com and dacefamilytrust@gmail.com. 1 The Clerk of Court is also kindly directed to email this Order to the following email 2 || addresses: Philip.dace@gmail.com and dacefamilytrust@gmail.com. 3 4 Dated this 25 day of November, 2024. 5 6 Gloria avarro, District Judge 7 Unite tes District Court 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 3 of 3