Productos Y Servicios Del Centro S.A. de C.V. et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Filing 22

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO TRANSFER VENUE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/7/2015) Modified on 7/7/2015 (dtmS, COURT STAFF). [Transferred from California Northern on 7/9/2015.]

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

David M. Mannion (State Bar No. 288627)
BLAKELEY LLP
54 W. 40th Street
New York, New York 10018
Telephone: [phone]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
MARK D. LONERGAN (State Bar No. 143622)
[e-mail]
REBECCA S. SAELAO (State Bar No. 222731)
[e-mail]
SEVERSON & WERSON
A Professional Corporation
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
14
15
16
17
18
19

PRODUCTOS Y SERVICIOS DEL CENTRO ) Case No.: C 15-02218 WHA
S.A. DE C.V. and SUMMIT RAILROAD
)
PRODUCTS, INC.,
) STIPULATION TO TRANSFER VENUE
) PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), OR IN
Plaintiffs,
) THE ALTERNATIVE PURSUANT TO 28
) U.S.C. § 1406, AND FURTHER EXTENDING
v.
) TIME FOR WELLS FARGO TO RESPOND
) TO COMPLAINT
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
)
)
Defendant.
)
)

20
21
22
23
24
25
07685.1478/4304520.1

STIPULATION TO TRANSFER VENUE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)
Case No.: C 15-02218 WHA

1

WHEREAS, This action was initiated on May 18, 2015, by Plaintiffs Productos Y Servicios

2

Del Centro S.A. de C.V. (“PYS”) and Summit Railroad Products, Inc. (“Summit,” and together with

3

PYS, “Plaintiffs”). Plaintiffs allege that certain funds were accidentally deposited by PYS into

4

Wells Fargo customer account no. XXXXXX4202 (the “Account”) in response to an allegedly

5

fraudulent email. (Complaint, filed May 18, 2015, at ¶¶ 1, 11.)

6

WHEREAS, according to Wells Fargo’s records the Account belongs to an Alabama limited

7

liability company, International Education Agency LLC (“IEA”). On information and belief, IEA

8

appears to be formed under the laws of the state of Alabama, and is registered with the Alabama

9

Secretary of State, with a principal place of business in Huntsville, Alabama. On information and

10

belief, IEA’s members appear to be residents of the judicial district for the Northern District of

11

Alabama. Additionally, the only authorized signers on the Account on behalf of IEA are Oluseyi

12

Babalola and Mary Babalola (the “Babalolas”). On information and belief, the Babalolas are

13

residents of the judicial district for the Northern District of Alabama.

14

WHEREAS, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) intends to file an interpleader

15

counterclaim and third party complaint against IEA and the Babalolas (the “Interpleader

16

Defendants”), to interplead funds in the Account pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1335, and 2361,

17

and pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 22.

18

WHEREAS, the parties anticipate that the Interpleader Defendants may not be subject to

19

personal jurisdiction in the Northern District of California, but, on information and belief, they are

20

subject to personal jurisdiction in the Northern District of Alabama.

21

WHEREAS, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), or in the alternative pursuant to 27 U.S.C.

22

§ 1406, the parties consent to the transfer of this action to the Huntsville Division of the United

23

States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, and respectfully submit that such transfer

24

is in the interest of justice because the Interpleader Defendants may not be subject to personal

25

07685.1478/4304520.1

26

2
STIPULATION TO TRANSFER VENUE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)
Case No.: C 15-02218 WHA

1

jurisdiction in this Court. Cf., Sparling v. Hoffman Const. Co., 864 F.2d 635, 639 (9th Cir. 1988)

2

(holding that transfer of litigation between subcontractor and general contractor to Alaska – under

3

circumstances where project owner resided in Alaska and project was located there – was not abuse

4

of discretion given trial court’s consideration of all factors affecting transfer, especially possibility

5

that owner, who might be joined as a party, probably would not be subject to personal jurisdiction

6

outside Alaska); see also Sandoval v. Redfin Corp., 14-4444 SC, 2015 WL 65085, at *1 (N.D. Cal.

7

Jan. 5, 2015) (granting parties’ stipulation to transfer case to C.D. Cal.). Additionally, Wells Fargo

8

contends that the Interpleader Defendants are necessary, indispensable, and/or desirable parties to

9

this action, further supporting transfer to a district with jurisdiction over the Interpleader Defendants.

10

See Celanese Corp. v. Fed. Energy Admin., 410 F. Supp. 571, 578 (D.D.C. 1976) (transferring case

11

under 28 U.S.C. § 1404 to location where additional arguably indispensable party was subject to

12

jurisdiction, and holding that “without deciding whether Consumers is indispensable, the Court

13

hereby recognizes that § 1406(a) provides an additional basis for the transfer of this action if

14

Consumers is an indispensable party to the proceedings before this Court.”) (collecting cases

15

approving transfer to forum with jurisdiction over necessary or indispensable parties).

16

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs agree that Wells Fargo shall have through and including one week

17

from the date that this Court approves transfer of this case, and the Northern District of Alabama

18

accepts transfer (or alternatively one week from the date this Court denies transfer), to answer or

19

otherwise respond to the Plaintiffs’ complaint, including by filing its interpleader counterclaim and

20

third party complaint. However, in the event this Court rules on this stipulation prior to July 8, 2015,

21

Wells Fargo shall have at least through July 15, 2015 to answer or otherwise respond to the

22

Plaintiffs’ complaint, including by filing its interpleader counterclaim and third party complaint.

23

WHEREAS, the parties’ stipulated injunction dated May 20, 2015 (Doc. No. 13) shall remain

24

in full force and effect, until further agreement of the parties or Order of this or the transferee Court.

25

07685.1478/4304520.1

26

3
STIPULATION TO TRANSFER VENUE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)
Case No.: C 15-02218 WHA

1

The Parties therefore STIPULATE as follows:

2

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), the parties consent to the transfer of this action in its entirety to

3
4
5
6
7

the Huntsville Division of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.
The parties’ stipulated injunction dated May 20, 2015 (Doc. No. 13) shall remain in full force
and effect, until further agreement of the parties or Order of this or the transferee Court.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
DATED: July 6, 2015

By:

/s/ Rebecca S. Saelao
Rebecca S. Saelao
Attorneys for Defendant WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A

8
9
10

SEVERSON & WERSON

DATED: July 6, 2015

BLAKELEY LLP
By:

/s/ David M. Mannion
David M. Mannion
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

11
12
13

Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 5-1(i)(3) regarding signatures, I, Rebecca Saelao, attest that
concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from each of the other signatories.

14

By:

/s/ Rebecca S. Saelao

15
16

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) [or, alternatively, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406], the Court

17
DIRECTS the Clerk to transfer this action, in its entirety, to the Northern District of Alabama,
18
Huntsville Division. The parties’ stipulated injunction dated May 20, 2015 (Doc. No. 13) shall
19
remain in full force and effect, until further agreement of the parties or Order of this or the transferee
20
Court.
21
7
DATED: July ___, 2015
______________________________________
WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

22
23
24
25
26

07685.1478/4304520.1

4
STIPULATION TO TRANSFER VENUE PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)
Case No.: C 15-02218 WHA