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

Filing 58

ORDER re 57 Joint Case Management Statement, granting Plaintiffs leave to file a Rule 15 motion and vacating case management conference. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 6/12/2013. (sclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/12/2013)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

9
10

ROBERT CHANDLER, AS
REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF
ROSEMARY S. CHANDLER,
individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated,

11
Plaintiff,
12
v.
13
14

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., and
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE
ASSOCIATION a/k/a FANNIE MAE,

15
Defendants.
16

) Case No. 11-03831 SC
)
) ORDER
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

17
Plaintiff Robert Chandler ("Plaintiff") filed his complaint in
18
this matter on August 3, 2011.

ECF No. 1.

("Compl.").

On October

19
4, 2011, Defendants Federal National Mortgage Association and Wells
20
Fargo Bank, N.A. (collectively, "Defendants") moved to dismiss.
21
ECF No. 25 ("Mot.").

The motion was fully briefed and scheduled

22
for a hearing on January 13, 2012.

ECF Nos. 29, 33.

The Court

23
deferred ruling on the Motion pending the outcome of the parties'
24
mediation efforts.

ECF No. 45.

25
The parties recently filed a joint case management statement,
26
indicating that they have been unable to reach agreement on some
27
key terms.
28

ECF No. 57.

Both parties now agree that litigation

1

should resume.

2

July 18, 2013 to move for leave to file an amended complaint so

3

that he can provide additional allegations concerning the two years

4

since the original complaint.

5

a showing that the proposed amendments will cure the purported

6

pleading defects, the Court should consider the motion to dismiss

7

before entertaining a motion for leave to amend.

8
9

Id.

Plaintiff proposes that he be permitted until

Id.

Defendants submit that, absent

The Court finds that the most efficient solution is to
consider Plaintiff's Rule 15 motion first.

The proposed amended

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

10

complaint may cure some of the deficiencies identified by

11

Defendants' motion to dismiss.

12

required to grant leave to amend to cure pleading deficiencies,

13

allowing Plaintiff to amend now may obviate the need to adjudicate

14

multiple motions to dismiss.

15

Further, as the Court is generally

Plaintiff shall file a Rule 15 motion in accordance with Civil

16

Local Rule 7 within twenty-one (21) days of the signature date of

17

this Order.

18

to cure any legitimate pleading defects identified in Defendants'

19

pending motion to dismiss.

20

motion, or Plaintiff fails to file one, the Court will take

21

Defendants' currently pending motion to dismiss under submission.

22

The case management conference previously scheduled for June 14,

23

2013 is hereby VACATED.

Plaintiff's proposed amended complaint should attempt

If the Court denies Plaintiff's Rule 15

24
25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26
27

Dated: June 12, 2013

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2