Shafir v. Aegis Wholesale Corp., et al.

Filing 23

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT Plaintiff's Motions for Alternative Service on Defendant RBS Acceptance 11 ; ORDER DENYING AS MOOT Defendants' Motion to Dismiss 5 ; ORDER RESETTING Hearing on Motion to Remand 14 . Plaintiff& #039;s Motion to Remand 14 is CONTINUED to 9/3/2014, at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 7 (SKO) before Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto. The case management conference set for August 21, 2014, at 4:30 p.m. shall remain on calendar and telephonic appearances for this conference are approved and encouraged. Order signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 8/1/2014. (Timken, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
10

IGOR SHAFIR,
Plaintiff,

11
12

CASE NO. 1:14-cv-00957---SKO
ORDER DENYING AS MOOT
PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR
ALTERNATIVE SERVICE ON
DEFENDANT RBS ACCEPTANCE

v.

13
14

(Doc. 11)

15
16
17

AEGIS WHOLESALE CORP., et al.,

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT
DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS
(Doc. 5)

Defendants.

18
19

ORDER RESETTING HEARING ON
MOTION TO REMAND
(Doc. 14)

20
21
22

___________________________________/

23
24

Plaintiff Igor Shafir ("Plaintiff") filed this action on May 6, 2014, in the Fresno County

25

Superior Court against Defendants Aegis Wholesale Corporation (“Aegis”), Wells Fargo Bank,

26

N.A. ("Wells Fargo"), Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. ("Select"), RBS Financial Products, Inc.

27

(“RBS Financial”), RBS Acceptance Inc. (“RBS Acceptance”), and Mortgage Electronic

28

Registration Systems, Inc. ("MERS"). Defendants Wells Fargo and Select removed the action

1

1

to this Court on June 18, 2014. (Doc. 1.) On June 25, 2014, Defendants MERS, Select, and

2

Wells Fargo filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint, which is currently set to be heard on

3

September 3, 2014. (Doc. 5.)

4

On July 10, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion to permit alternative service upon Defendant

5

RBS Acceptance. (Doc. 11.) On July 16, 2014, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint

6

naming Defendant Reconstruct Company, N.A. (“Reconstruct”) as an additional defendant. 1

7

(Doc. 13.) On July 17, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion to remand. (Doc. 14.) On July 28, 2014,

8

MERS, Select, Wells Fargo, RBS Acceptance, and RBS Financial filed oppositions to Plaintiff's

9

motion to remand. (Docs. 17. 18.) Plaintiff's motion to remand is currently set to be heard on

10

August 11, 2014.
Plaintiff's motion to permit alternative service upon RBS Acceptance has been rendered

11
12

moot by the appearance of RBS Acceptance.

Further, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

13

15(a)(1)(B) provides that a party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within 21

14

days after service of a motion pursuant to Rule 12(b). Defendants Wells Fargo, Select, and

15

MERS filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff's original complaint on June 25, 2014, before Plaintiff

16

filed a First Amended Complaint on July 16, 2014. (Doc. 13.) As such, Defendants' motion to

17

dismiss the original complaint has been rendered moot.

18

Plaintiff's motion to remand is currently set to be heard on August 11, 2014. However,

19

Defendant Recontrust has not yet appeared in the litigation, and a case management conference

20

is currently set for August 21, 2014. All parties except Defendant Recontrust have consented to

21

the jurisdiction of the U.S. Magistrate Judge. To provide time for Defendant Recontrust to be

22

served and to appear in the litigation, the motion to remand shall be continued to September 3,

23

2014.

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28
1

Aegis was not named in the first Amended Complaint.

2

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1.

3

Plaintiff's motion for alternative service of RBS Acceptance is DENIED AS
MOOT;

2.

4
5

Defendants Wells Fargo, Select, and MERS' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's original
complaint is DENIED AS MOOT;

3.

6

Plaintiff's Motion to Remand is CONTINUED to September 3, 2014, at 9:30
a.m.; and

7
4.

8

The case management conference set for Augsut 21, 2014, at 4:30 p.m. shall
remain on calendar and telephonic appearances for this conference are

9

approved and encouraged.2

10
11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14

Dated:

August 1, 2014

/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

All parties wishing to appear telephonically shall coordinate one conference call to the Court at the date and time
for the conference at [phone].

3