Carvalho v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Filing 10

STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 5/19/2016 ORDERING that Defendant's 4 Motion to Dismiss is CONTINUED to 7/14/2016 at 02:00 PM in Courtroom 2 (TLN) before District Judge Troy L. Nunley.(Reader, L)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 Alexander W. Munn, Esq. (166915) awmunn@bpelaw.com BPE LAW GROUP, PC 2339 Gold Meadow Way, Suite 101 Gold River, CA 95670 Tel. 916.966.2260 Fax 916.346.4880 5 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff K.C. CARVALHO 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 K.C. CARVALHO, an Individual, Plaintiff, 12 13 vs. 14 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; and DOES 1 through 25, 15 16 Defendants. 17 18 19 20 21 22 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: CASE 2:16-CV-00618-TLN-EFB Assigned to Hon. Troy L. Nunley STIPULATION TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS Continued Hearing Date: June 2, 2016 Time: 2:00 p.m. Ctrm: 2, 15th Floor Stipulated Date: Time: Ctrm: July 14, 2016 2:00 p.m. 2, 15th Floor The Parties hereby STIPULATE that Defendant WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.’s Motion to 23 24 Dismiss, currently to be heard on June 2, 2016, be continued to July 14, 2016. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED. 25 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// STIPULATION TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE CASE NO.: 2:16-CV-00618-TLN-EFB 1 Respectfully Submitted, 2 BPE LAW GROUP, P.C. 3 4 Dated: May 18, 2016 5 6 By: /s/ Alexander W. Munn Alexander W. Munn, Esq. awmunn@bpelaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiff K.C. Carvalho 7 8 Respectfully Submitted, 9 ANGLIN, FLEWELLING, RASMUSSEN, CAMPBELL & TRYTTEN LLP 10 11 Dated: May 18, 2016 12 13 By: /s/ David M. Newman (approved on May 18, 2016) David M. Newman, Esq. dnewman@afrct.com Attorneys for Defendant Wells Fargo, N.A. 14 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 17 18 19 Dated: May 19, 2016 Troy L. Nunley United States District Judge 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STIPULATION TO CONTINUE HEARING DATE CASE NO.: 2:16-CV-00618-TLN-EFB

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?