Schaeffer v. Wachoivia Mortgage Corporation et al

Filing 18

STIPULATION AND ORDER RE 17 FOR EXTENSION OF TIME RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION. Preliminary Injunction Hearing set for 7/5/2012 01:30 PM. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 6/8/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/8/2012)

A NGLIN F LEWELLING R ASMUSSEN C AMPBELL & T RYTTEN LLP

1 Robert A. Bailey (# 214688)
[e-mail]
2 Grace B. Kang (# 229464)
[e-mail]
3 ANGLIN, FLEWELLING, RASMUSSEN,
CAMPBELL & TRYTTEN LLP
4 199 South Los Robles Avenue, Suite 600
Pasadena, California 91101-2459
5 Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
6
Attorneys for Defendant
7 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., successor
by merger with Wells Fargo Bank
8 Southwest, N.A., f/k/a Wachovia Mortgage,
FSB, f/k/a World Savings Bank, FSB (sued
9 as “Wachovia Mortgage Corporation”)
(“Wells Fargo”)
10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
14 PAULETTE SCHAEFFER,

CASE NO.: 3:12-CV-02031-RS

Plaintiff,

15

[Assigned to the Honorable Richard Seeborg]

v.

16

JOINT STIPULATION FOR EXTENSION
17 WACHOVIA MORTGAGE CORPORATION, OF TIME RE BRIEFING SCHEDULE
a Division of WELLS FARGO, N.A.; CAL
FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
18 WESTERN RECONVEYANCE
Date:
June 21, 2012
Defendants.
Time:
1:30 p.m.
19
Ctrm:
3, 17th Floor
20
21
22 TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
Plaintiff Paulette Schaeffer (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.,

23

24 successor by merger with Wells Fargo Bank Southwest, N.A., f/k/a Wachovia Mortgage, FSB
25 (erroneously sued as “Wachovia Mortgage Corporation”) (“Wells Fargo”) stipulate to extending
26 the briefing schedule for preliminary injunction hearing.
27 / / /
28 / / /
93000/FR0367/00399070-1{

1

CASE NO.: 3:12-CV-02031-RS
JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME
TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

JOINT STIPULATION

1
2

1.

Pursuant to Court Order entered May 24, 2012, (Docket #11), Defendant Wells

3 Fargo agreed to voluntarily postpone the foreclosure sale until June 29, 2012; timely filing its
4 Statement. Plaintiff’s TRO application was denied as moot and is addressed as an application for
5 a Preliminary Injunction (the “Preliminary Injunction”)
6

2.

As such, pursuant to Court Order, the original briefing scheduling was as follows:
a. Defendant’s opposition to the Preliminary Injunction to be filed on June 7,

A NGLIN F LEWELLING R ASMUSSEN C AMPBELL & T RYTTEN LLP

7

2012;

8

b. Plaintiff’s reply to be filed on June 14, 2012; and

9

c. a Preliminary Injunction hearing, if necessary, would be on June 21, 2012

10

at 1:30p.m.

11
12

3.

While the documents necessary were requested, Defendant Wells Fargo is

13 currently compiling the documents to file its opposition.
14

4.

The parties stipulate to a short extension regarding the briefing schedule and

15

Preliminary Injunction hearing as follows:

16

a. Defendant Wells Fargo to file its opposition to the Preliminary Injunction by
June 21, 2012;

17
18

b. Plaintiff to file her reply by June 28, 2012;

19

c. The Preliminary Injunction hearing, if necessary, to be heard on July 5, 2012,
at 1:30p.m. or July ____, 2012 at _____ a.m./p.m.

20
21

5.

Defendant Wells Fargo agrees to postpone the foreclose sale until July 13, 2012.

22

6.

There is no prejudice to Plaintiff and the extension is necessary for Defendant

23 Wells Fargo to submit essential documentary evidence in support of its opposition.
24
25
26
27
28
93000/FR0367/00399070-1{

2

CASE NO.: 3:12-CV-02031-RS
JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME
TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

A

H

ER

rg

LI

o
ard Seeb

R NIA

ERED

FO

S
UNIT
ED
NO

ich
Judge R

RT

O ORD
IT IS S

RT
U
O

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

C

Dated: 6/8/12