Harris v. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development et al

Filing 5

STIPULATION and ORDER re: 4 Stipulation and Proposed Order signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 8/12/2014. The last day for the Plaintiff to file his Motion to Remand shall be extended to September 22, 2014. The last day for Defendant HUD to file its Answer or other responsive pleading tothe Plaintiffs Verified Complaint shall be extended to September 12, 2014.(Waggoner, D)

1
2
3
4
5
6

ALLAN R. FRUMKIN, ESQ. (SBN 50543)
LAW OFFICES OF ALLAN R. FRUMKIN, INC.
3268 Penryn Road Suite 100
Loomis, CA 95650
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
CHRIS HARRIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

CHRIS HARRIS,

Case No. 2:l4-CV-01769-JAM-AC

Plaintiff.

10
11

vs.

12

THE SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT OF
WASHINGTON D.C., HIS SUCCESSORS
AND ASSIGNS; THAO PHAM, an
individual; MIGUEL A. UGARTE, an
individual; MID VALLEY MORTGAGE
SERVICES INC., a California corporation,
and DOES 1 through 30,

13
14
15
16
17

STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINES
FOR FILING OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO REMAND AND DEFENDANT’S
RESPONSIVE PLEADING; ORDER

Defendants.

18
19

BACKGROUND

20

1. Plaintiff CHRIS HARRIS (herein referred to as “Plaintiff”) filed his Verified

21

Complaint against Defendant SHAUN DONOVAN as the ACTING SECRETARY OF

22

HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT OF WASHINGTON D.C., HIS SUCCESSORS

23

AND ASSIGNS (herein referred to “Defendant HUD”) and others in Placer County Superior

24

Court, California, Case No. SCV0034914.

25
26
27

2.

Prior to filing an answer or other responsive pleading in the state court action,

Defendant HUD filed its Notice of Removal (Docket No. 1) on July 25, 2014 to the United
States District Court, Eastern District of California.

28
-1Stipulation to Extend Deadlines (Harris v. HUD)

1

3. The parties understand that under 28 U.S.C. §1447(c), a Motion to Remand
2

following removal to federal court must be filed no later than thirty (30) days after the filing of
3

the Notice of Removal. Since Notice of Removal in this case was filed on July 25, 2014, the
4
5
6
7
8
9

thirty-day deadline for filing a Motion to Remand falls on Sunday, August 24, 2014. By
operation of Federal Rule of Procedure (“FRCP”) 6(a)(1)(c), the parties understand that in this
case, the final day for Plaintiff to file a Motion to Remand is Monday, August 25, 2014.
4. The parties further understand that since Defendant HUD has yet to file an answer
to Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint prior to its removal to federal court, the deadline for Defendant

10

HUD to file an Answer or other responsive pleadings is governed by FRCP 81(c (2)(A)-(C).

11

For the purposes of calculating this deadline, the parties agree that deadline is twenty-one (21)

12

days after July 25, 2014, or August 15, 2014.

13

5. The parties are currently negotiating in good faith in the hopes that a settlement of

14

the entire action can be reached. To avoid unnecessary of legal expense and use of judicial

15

resources, the parties (through their respective legal counsel) to extend the above-referenced

16
17

deadlines by twenty-eight (28) days in the hopes that a final settlement can be reached in that
time frame.

18

STIPULATION
19

Plaintiff and Defendant HUD, through their respective attorneys, hereby stipulate to the
20

entry of an Order providing that:
21
22
23
24
25

1. The last day for the Plaintiff to file his Motion to Remand shall be extended to
September 22, 2014.
2. The last day for Defendant HUD to file its Answer or other responsive pleading to
the Plaintiff’s Verified Complaint shall be extended to September 12, 2014.

26
27
28
-2Stipulation to Extend Deadlines (Harris v. HUD)

1
2

Dated:

August 12, 2014

LAW OFFICES OF ALLAN R. FRUMKIN, INC.

3

By: /s/ Allan R. Frumkin
Allan R. Frumkin, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff
CHRIS HARRIS

4
5
6
7

Dated:

August 12, 2014

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

8
9

By: /s/ Gregory T. Broderick
Gregory T. Broderick, Esq.
Attorney for Defendant
SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT

10
11
12
13

ORDER
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16
17

Dated: 8/12/2014

18

/s/ John A. Mendez____________
United States District Court Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3Stipulation to Extend Deadlines (Harris v. HUD)

1

PROOF OF SERVICE

2

I am employed by LAW OFFICES OF ALLAN R. FRUMKIN, INC. in the County of Placer, State of California. I
am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My business address 3268 Penryn Road. Ste. 100,
Loomis, CA 95650. On the signature date below, I served the document, described as:

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEADLINES FOR FILING OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND
AND DEFENDANT’S RESPONSIVE PLEADING; ORDER
on each interested party in this action, as follows:
Gregory T. Broderick
United States Attorney's Office
501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, CA 95814
916-554-2780; Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorney for SECRETARY OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
X (VIA NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC FILING [“NEF”]) Pursuant to Local Rule 135 (FRCP 5), the document
will be served by the Court’s CM/ECF system via NEF and hyperlink to the document(s) upon all participants who
are registered CM/ECF users in this case.
(BY U.S. MAIL) I placed a true copy or original of the document(s) in a sealed envelope addressed to each
interested party as set forth above. I placed each such envelope, with postage thereon fully prepaid, for collection
and mailing at Lynes & Associates, Roseville, California. I am readily familiar with Lynes & Associates’ practice
for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Under that
practice, the correspondence would be deposited in the United States Postal Service on that same day in the
ordinary course of business.
(BY FACSIMILE) By use of facsimile machine telephone number [phone], I served a copy of the
within document on the above interested parties at the facsimile numbers listed above. The transmission was
reported as complete and without error. The transmission report, which is attached to this proof of service, was
properly issued by the transmitting facsimile machine.
(BY OVERNIGHT EXPRESS) I deposited in a box or other facility maintained by Overnight Express
delivery service, an express carrier service, or delivered to a courier or driver authorized by said express carrier
service to receive documents, a true copy or original of the document(s), in an envelope designated by said express
service carrier, with delivery fees paid or provided.
X (FEDERAL ONLY) I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this Court at whose
direction the service was made.

24

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and
correct.

25

Dated: August 12, 2014

/s/ Steven Lynes

26
27
28
-4Stipulation to Extend Deadlines (Harris v. HUD)

.

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

VERIFICATION
- 1Name v. Name
Alameda County Superior Court Case No.