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

Filing 191

ORDER granting request for extension (#189) (tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/14/2012)

1
2
3
4

Stephen C. Seto (SBN 175458) ([e-mail])
Connor M. Day (SBN 233245) ([e-mail])
Buchman Provine Brothers Smith LLP
1333 N. California Blvd., Suite 350
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

5
6
7
8

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Fidelity National Title
Insurance Company, Commonwealth Land Title
Insurance Company, Ally Bank, Wesley W. Halihan,
Gina L. Halihan, Li-Ling Sung, Tiee-Shan Tsai,
Tatyana Madina, Dawn R. Carifi, Karrie L. Hanna,
Brian Phuong, Crichton Friedly and Janet N. Friedly

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Thomas J. LaLanne (SBN 55199)
([e-mail])
Law Offices of Thomas J. LaLanne
369 Broadway
San Francisco, CA 94133
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendants James C. Castle,
CCTT Group; CJT Financial Group; and Oreplex
International LLC, and Other Defendants
Ann McFarland Draper (SBN 65669)
([e-mail])
Draper Law Offices
601 Montgomery Street, Suite 1150
San Francisco, California 94111
Tel: [phone]
Fax [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant James C. Castle
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

21
22
23
24
25

FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE
INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.

27

JAMES C. CASTLE aka J.
CHRISTOPHER CASTLE at al., and
Does 1 through 100, inclusive,
Defendants.

28

No. C-11-00896 SI
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
EXTENDING TIME FOR PLAINTIFFS TO
RESPOND, AND DEFENDANTS TO REPLY,
ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS
PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND AMENDED
COMPLAINT

256828.1

26

BUCHMAN PROVINE
BROTHERS
SMITH LLP
ATTORN EY S AT LAW

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Extending Time to Respond to Motion to Dismiss

(No. C-11-00896 SI)

STIPULATION

1
2

Defendants Alicia A. Sanders, Jon P. Sanders, Daniel R. Young, Kelly E. Young, Lara

3

Karakasevic, Jolee Lange, Jason Young, CJT Financial Group, GJZ Group and Golden Hills

4

Group, Randall C. Crawford, Fahed M. Eweis, Nadia E. Eweis, Kevin Keith, Christy Keith,

5

Donald Porto, Patricia Porto, David R. Thompson, Melissa A. Thompson, Tisha L. Trites, Tisha

6

Trites Realty, Ryan Styles, James C. Castle, CCTT Group and Oreplex International LLC, Laura

7

M. Pezzi, John-Michael Di Chiara, Shon-Te-East-A, Walks With Spirit, Corporation Sole, Remus

8

Kirkpatrick, Golden Hills Trust and Financial Recovery Group (collectively “Defendants”) filed a

9

total of eleven (11) Notices of Motion and Motions to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended

10

Complaint on January 23, 2012 (the “Original Motions”) as well as a motion under the Colorado

11

River Doctrine to stay the action as to certain parties and transactions based on two pending state

12

court actions.

13

Defendants filed ten (10) Amended Notices of Motion and Motions to Dismiss (the “Amended

14

Motions.”). (The motion to stay and one of the motions to dismiss were not amended.) Four (4)

15

of the Amended Motions challenged additional causes of actions in Plaintiffs’ Second Amended

16

Complaint that were not challenged in the Original Motions.

17

Amended Motions will be collectively referred to as the “Motions”). All of the Motions are set

18

for hearing on March 23, 2012.

19
20

Thereafter, on January 30, 2012, January 31, 2012 and February 2, 2012,

(The Original Motions and

Plaintiffs’ response to Defendants’ motion to stay was filed when due on February 6,
2012. See Docket No. 140 (motion) and Docket No. 177 (opposition).

21

The Amended Motions of Defendants Alicia A. Sanders, Jon P. Sanders, Daniel R.

22

Young, Kelly E. Young, Lara Karakasevic, Jolee Lange, Jason Young, CJT Financial Group, GJZ

23

Group and Golden Hills Group, Randall C. Crawford, Fahed M. Eweis, Nadia E. Eweis, Kevin

24

Keith, Christy Keith, Donald Porto, Patricia Porto, David R. Thompson and Melissa A.

25

Thompson were filed on January 30, 2012 and Plaintiffs’ responses to said Amended Motions are

26

due on or before February 13, 2012. See Docket Nos. 154, 155, 156, 157 and 158.

27

The Amended Motion of Defendants Tisha L. Trites, Tisha Trites Realty and Ryan Styles

28

was filed on January 31, 2012 and Plaintiffs’ response to said Amended Motion is due on or

BUCHMAN PROVINE
BROTHERS
SMITH LLP
ATTORN EY S AT LAW

256828.1

-2-

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Extending Time to Respond and Reply re Motions to Dismiss (No. 3:11-cv-00896 SI)

1

before February 14, 2012. See Docket No. 159.

2

The Amended Motions of Defendants James C. Castle, CCTT Group and Oreplex

3

International LLC, Laura M. Pezzi, John-Michael Di Chiara, Shon-Te-East-A, Walks With Spirit,

4

Corporation Sole, Remus Kirkpatrick, Golden Hills Trust and Financial Recovery Group were

5

filed on February 2, 2012 and Plaintiffs’ responses to said Amended Motions are due on or before

6

February 16, 2012. See Docket Nos. 173, 174 and 175.

7

The Original Motion of Defendant Todd J. Smith was not amended but pursuant to

8

stipulation and order Plaintiffs’ response thereto is due on or before February 13, 2012. See

9

Docket No. 178 (order on stipulation).

10

Northern District of California Civil Local Rule 6-2(a) permits parties to file a stipulation

11

changing the time that would affect the date of a deadline fixed by Court order, Local Rules or

12

Federal Rules. In light of the large number of defendants who have filed Motions (a total of thirty

13

(30) Defendants and eleven (11) Motions), the complexity of the factual transactions underlying

14

the litigation, the complexity of the facts and legal arguments set forth in Defendants’ Motions

15

and the various acts and roles of the individual Defendants as alleged in the Second Amended

16

Complaint, the parties have agreed: (A) that Plaintiffs may have additional time, to and including

17

Thursday, March 1, 2012, in which to respond to all eleven (11) Motions filed by Defendants; (B)

18

that Defendants’ reply papers, if any, shall be due on March 9, 2012; and (C) that Defendants’

19

reply papers on the motion to stay shall also be due on March 9, 2012.

20

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between Plaintiffs and

21

Defendants as follows: (A) that Plaintiffs may have additional time, to and including Thursday,

22

March 1, 2012, in which to respond to all eleven (11) Motions to dismiss filed by Defendants; (B)

23

that Defendants’ reply papers, if any, shall be due on March 9, 2012; and (C) that Defendants’

24

reply papers on Defendants’ motion to stay shall also be due on March 9, 2012.

25

DATED: February 9, 2012

BUCHMAN PROVINE BROTHERS SMITH LLP

26
By:

27
28
BUCHMAN PROVINE
BROTHERS
SMITH LLP
ATTORN EY S AT LAW

256828.1

/s/ Connor M. Day
STEPHEN C. SETO
CONNOR M. DAY
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
-3-

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Extending Time to Respond and Reply re Motions to Dismiss (No. 3:11-cv-00896 SI)

1

DATED: February 9, 2012

LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS J. LALANNE

2
By:
3
4

/s/ Thomas J. LaLanne
THOMAS J. LALANNE
Attorneys for Defendants James C. Castle
(aka J. Christopher Castle), CCTT Group;
CJT Financial Group; and Oreplex International
LLC and other defendants

5
6
7

DATED: February 9, 2012

DRAPER LAW OFFICES

8
By:
9
10

/s/ Ann McFarland Draper
ANN McFARLAND DRAPER
Attorneys for Defendant James C. Castle
(aka J. Christopher Castle)

11
12
DECLARATION OF COUNSEL

13
14

I, Connor M. Day, hereby declare as follows:

15

1.

I am an attorney with the law office of Buchman Provine Brothers & Smith LLP,

16

attorneys of record herein for Plaintiffs Fidelity National Title Insurance Company,

17

Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company, Ally Bank, Wesley W. Halihan, Gina L.

18

Halihan, Li-Ling Sung, Tiee-Shan Tsai, Tatyana Madina, Dawn R. Carifi, Karrie L. Hanna, Brian

19

Phuong, Crichton Friedly and Janet N. Friedly (collectively, “Plaintiffs”). I am duly licensed to

20

practice before all of the courts of the State of California.
2.

21
22

I have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein and could and would testify

competently thereto if called upon to do so.
3.

23

Pursuant to Northern District of California Civil Local Rule 6-2(a), I submit this

24

declaration in support of Plaintiffs’ Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Extending the Time for

25

Plaintiffs’ to Respond to Defendants Motions to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint.
4.

26

Currently, the thirty (30) defendants represented by Thomas J. LaLanne have filed

27

a total of eleven (11) motions to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs’

28

responses to defendants’ motions to dismiss are due on February 13, 2012, February 14, 2012 and

BUCHMAN PROVINE
BROTHERS
SMITH LLP
ATTORN EY S AT LAW

256828.1

-4-

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Extending Time to Respond and Reply re Motions to Dismiss (No. 3:11-cv-00896 SI)

1

February 16, 2012. In addition, defendants also filed a motion to stay under the Colorado River

2

Doctrine, to which Plaintiffs have already filed their opposition and for which defendants’ reply

3

papers are currently due on February 13, 2012.

4

5.

In light of the large number of defendants who have filed Motions to dismiss (a

5

total of thirty (30) Defendants and eleven (11) Motions), the complexity of the factual

6

transactions underlying the litigation, the complexity of the facts and legal arguments set forth in

7

Defendants’ Motions and the various acts and roles of the individual Defendants as alleged in the

8

Second Amended Complaint, the parties have agreed that Plaintiffs may have additional time, to

9

and including Thursday, March 1, 2012, in which to respond to all eleven (11) of the Motions (to

10

dismiss) filed by Defendants; and accordingly the parties have also agreed that Defendants’ reply

11

papers on the eleven (11) Motions to dismiss, as well as Defendants’ reply papers on the motion

12

to stay, shall all be due on Friday, March 9, 2012.

13

6.

All eleven (11) motions to dismiss filed by the defendants are scheduled to be

14

heard by this Court on March 23, 2012 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 10. In addition, a case

15

management conference is currently scheduled for April 13, 2012. In light of the usual notice and

16

briefing schedule for motions in this district, I do not believe that extending the time within which

17

Plaintiffs can respond to Defendants’ Motions will have any effect on the current schedule of this

18

case or the hearing date of March 23, 2012.

19

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the

20

foregoing is true and correct. This declaration is executed at Walnut Creek, California, this 9th

21

day of February 2012.

22
/s/ Connor M. Day
CONNOR M. DAY

23
24
25
26
27
28
BUCHMAN PROVINE
BROTHERS
SMITH LLP
ATTORN EY S AT LAW

256828.1

-5-

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Extending Time to Respond and Reply re Motions to Dismiss (No. 3:11-cv-00896 SI)

[PROPOSED] ORDER

1
2

PURSUANT TO THE FOREDOING STIPULATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

3

THAT the time for Plaintiffs to file responses to the Amended Notices of Motion and Motions to

4

Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint filed on January 30, 2012, January 31, 2012 and

5

February 2, 2012 by defendants Alicia A. Sanders, Jon P. Sanders, Daniel R. Young, Kelly E.

6

Young, Lara Karakasevic, Jolee Lange, Jason Young, CJT Financial Group, GJZ Group and

7

Golden Hills Group, Randall C. Crawford, Fahed M. Eweis, Nadia E. Eweis, Kevin Keith,

8

Christy Keith, Donald Porto, Patricia Porto, David R. Thompson, Melissa A. Thompson, Tisha L.

9

Trites, Tisha Trites Realty, Ryan Styles, James C. Castle, CCTT Group and Oreplex International

10

LLC, Laura M. Pezzi, John-Michael Di Chiara, Shon-Te-East-A, Walks With Spirit, Corporation

11

Sole, Remus Kirkpatrick, Golden Hills Trust and Financial Recovery Group, shall be extended to

12

March 1, 2012.

13

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the time for Plaintiffs to file a response to defendant

14

Todd J. Smith’s Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint

15

shall be extended to March 1, 2012.

16

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the Defendants shall have to and including March 9,

17

2012, in which to file their reply papers on the motion to stay and on the eleven (11) motions to

18

dismiss.

19
IT IS SO ORDERED.

20
21

Dated: February __, 2012
14
________________________________________
SUSAN ILLSTON
Untied States District Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
BUCHMAN PROVINE
BROTHERS
SMITH LLP
ATTORN EY S AT LAW

256828.1

-6-

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Extending Time to Respond and Reply re Motions to Dismiss (No. 3:11-cv-00896 SI)