Schrupp v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al.

Filing 42

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 2/14/18 ORDERING that no later than 2/19/2018, defendant's counsel shall confer with his client, and communicate with Plaintiff, regarding the existence of a written policy or procedure. The F2/12/18 Discovery completion deadline is EXTENDED for the limited purpose of conducting the above-mentioned discovery activities only. All other scheduling deadlines remain unchanged, subject to any modification by the district judge. Plaintiff's ex parte application for a general extension of the discovery completion deadline 39 is DENIED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

PAUL SCHRUPP,

12
13
14

No. 2:16-cv-0636-WBS-KJN

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,

15
16

Defendant.

17
18

On February 12, 2018, the court conducted an informal telephonic discovery conference

19

in this matter. Attorney Eric Mercer appeared on behalf of plaintiff, and attorney Dennis La

20

appeared on behalf of defendant. After considering the parties’ written submissions (ECF Nos.

21

38, 39, 40), and for the reasons discussed with the parties at the conference, IT IS HEREBY

22

ORDERED that:

23

1. No later than February 19, 2018, defendant’s counsel shall confer with his client, and

24

communicate with plaintiff, regarding the existence of a written policy or procedure

25

concerning how loan payments made to a bankruptcy trustee are treated by Wells

26

Fargo. If such a policy or procedure exists, defendant shall promptly produce it to

27

plaintiff, and the parties shall meet and confer regarding whether any supplemental

28

Rule 30(b)(6) testimony with respect to such a policy or procedure is necessary.
1

1

2. Plaintiff’s request for supplemental Rule 30(b)(6) testimony with respect to the LMNT

2

records is denied without prejudice. The parties shall promptly meet and confer

3

regarding (a) the existence of any LMNT documents that have not been produced; (b)

4

the existence of a policy or procedure that explains or clarifies the LMNT documents;

5

and (c) the need for, and propriety of, supplemental Rule 30(b)(6) testimony

6

concerning the LMNT documents, including the extent to which other measures, such

7

as declarations or stipulations, could be employed to avoid additional deposition

8

testimony.

9
10
11

3. Pursuant to plaintiff’s representation at the conference, all other discovery issues
raised in the parties’ joint statement are deemed withdrawn.
4. The February 12, 2018 discovery completion deadline is extended for the limited

12

purpose of conducting the above-mentioned discovery activities only. All other

13

scheduling deadlines remain unchanged, subject to any modification by the district

14

judge.

15
16
17
18

5. Plaintiff’s ex parte application for a general extension of the discovery completion
deadline (ECF No. 39) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 14, 2018

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2