Shawcroft v. Roundpoint Mortgage Servicing Corporation et al

Filing 33

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/20/16, ORDERING that The Discovery cutoff in this action is CONTINUED to 12/31/2016, only for purposes of allowing plaintiff to respond to the written discovery propounded by defendant that is the subject of the parties current discovery dispute and for defendant to take plaintiffs deposition. Plaintiff shall permit defendant to conduct a property inspection in connection with Plaintiff's pending loan modification request, if defendant determines such an inspection necessary, by no later than 5:00 P.M., on 11/4/2016.(Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BARBARA SHAWCROFT,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

No. 2:15-cv-0698-MCE-KJN

ORDER

v.
ROUNDPOINT MORTGAGE
SERVICING CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18

On October 19, 2016, an informal telephonic discovery conference was held in this matter

19

before the undersigned to address the parties’ dispute regarding the written discovery requests

20

defendant Roundpoint Mortgage Servicing Company (“defendant”) has propounded on plaintiff

21

Barbara Shawcroft (“plaintiff”). Attorney Chad Carlock appeared telephonically on behalf of

22

plaintiff. Attorney Kristina Pelletier appeared telephonically on behalf of defendant.
Based on the parties’ joint statement, other relevant filings, and arguments made during

23
24

the telephonic conference, and for the reasons stated by the undersigned during the telephonic

25

conference, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

26

////

27

////

28

////
1

1

1. The discovery cutoff in this action is continued to December 31, 2016, only for

2

purposes of allowing plaintiff to respond to the written discovery propounded by

3

defendant that is the subject of the parties’ current discovery dispute and for defendant

4

to take plaintiff’s deposition.1

5

2. Plaintiff shall permit defendant to conduct a property inspection in connection with

6

plaintiff’s pending loan modification request, if defendant determines such an

7

inspection necessary, by no later than 5:00 P.M., on November 4, 2016, or on another

8

mutually agreed upon date and time thereafter if the parties so stipulate.
3. In all other respects defendant’s motion to compel discovery responses is denied

9
10

without prejudice if the parties cannot agree upon the requested discovery.

11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 20, 2016

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

As the undersigned discussed with counsel during the telephonic hearing, any further disputes
relative to this discovery shall be resolved by appropriate order if necessary and, where discovery
has been ordered, the order complied with by December 31, 2016.
2