Basham et al v. Pacific Funding Group et al

Filing 37

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge William B. Shubb on 4/12/2010 re 36 ORDERING that Plaintiffs Carole Basham and Daniel Basham are granted permission to file the 34 Amended Complaint that was previously untimely filed on April 5, 2010. Defendants' 26 pending Motion to dismiss is deemed withdrawn. Defendants shall have until May 5, 2010 to respond to the First Amended Complaint. (Duong, D)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Stephen C. Ruehmann (167533) LAW OFFICES OF STEPHEN C. RUEHMANN 9580 Oak Avenue Parkway, #15 Folsom, CA 95630 Tel (916) 988-8001/Fax (916) 988-8002 ruehmannlaw@yahoo.com Marc A. Fisher, Esq. (47794) LAW OFFICES OF MARC A. FISHER 9580 Oak Avenue Parkway, #15 Folsom, CA 95630 Tel (916) 988-8001/Fax (916) 988-8002 mfisher@cosentinolaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs DANIEL R. BASHAM and CAROLE BASHAM UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) vs. ) PACIFIC FUNDING GROUP, a California ) ) business entity, form unknown; ) MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC ) REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.; a Deleware corporation; WELLS FARGO ) HOME MORTGAGE, INC., a California ) corporation, dba AMERICA'S SERVICE ) ) COMPANY; CITIBANK N.A. AS INDENTURE TRUSTEE FOR BSARM ) 2007-2, a business entity, form unknown; ) ) NDEX WEST, L.L.C., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1-100, Inclusive, ) ) ) Defendants. ) DANIEL R. BASHAM and CAROLE BASHAM, Case No.: 2:10-CV-00096-WBS-GGH STIPULATION TO AMEND COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FRCP 15 (a)(2); PROPOSED ORDER Date: N/A Time: N/A Courtroom: Courtroom 5, 14th Floor Judge: Hon. William B. Shubb Complaint Filed: January 13, 2010 -1STIPULATION TO AMEND COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FRCP 15 (a)(2) & PROPOSED ORDER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I. INTRODUCTION On April 5, 2010, Plaintiffs Carole Basham and Daniel Basham filed a First Amended Complaint once as a matter of right prior to the filing of a responsive pleading as permitted under the old Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1)(B). Defendants filed a Statement pursuant to FRCP 15(a) directing Plaintiffs' attention to the new rule which required Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint be filed by March 18, 2010. Plaintiffs apologize for the oversight and have agreed with Defendants to stipulate to Plaintiffs permitted filing of the First Amended complaint received and filed in this Court on April 5, 2010. II. STIPULATION Plaintiffs and Defendants Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and Citibank, N.A., as Indenture Trustee for BSRAM 2007-2, hereby agree pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) to permit Plaintiffs to file the Amended Complaint that was untimely filed with this Court on April 5, 2010. If this stipulation is satisfactory to the Court, Defendants Wells Fargo and Citibank request that their current Motion to Dismiss be deemed withdrawn. Defendants shall have until May 5, 2010 to respond to the First Amended Complaint. IT IS SO STIPULATED. Dated: April 7, 2010 __________/S/___________ Stephen C. Ruehmann Fisher & Ruehmann, LLP Attorney for Plaintiffs Dated: April 7, 2010 __/s/_____________________ Jon D. Ives SEVERSON & WERSON Attorneys for Defendants -2STIPULATION TO AMEND COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FRCP 15 (a)(2) & PROPOSED ORDER 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION of the parties, Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2), and finding Good Cause therefore, this Court HEREBY ORDERS that: 1. Plaintiffs Carole Basham and Daniel Basham are granted permission to file the Amended Complaint that was previously untimely filed on April 5, 2010. 2. Defendants' pending Motion to dismiss is deemed withdrawn. 3. Defendants shall have until May 5, 2010 to respond to the First Amended Complaint. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 12, 2010 -3STIPULATION TO AMEND COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO FRCP 15 (a)(2) & PROPOSED ORDER

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?