New v. U.S. Bank Association as Trustee for the Benefit of Harborview 2005-2 Trust Fund et al

Filing 26

REQUEST RE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. Signed by Judge Alsup on 4/9/2014. (whalc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/9/2014) (Additional attachment(s) added on 4/9/2014: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (dt, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
JOSEPH S. NEW,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14

Plaintiff,

No. C 14-00150 WHA

v.
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
et al.

REQUEST RE CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Defendants.

15

/

16
17

In this foreclosure action, pro se plaintiff Joseph New claims that defendants have

18

foreclosed on the wrong property. Plaintiff states that the foreclosure sale has already occurred,

19

but he still retains possession of the property (Br. at 1; Dkt. No. 25). While he claims that the

20

sheriff has been preventing from executing a writ of possession on his property due to a stay in a

21

concurrent bankruptcy proceeding, he will seek a preliminary injunction against the sheriff as

22

well.

23

Although unclear, his complaint seems to allege that the relevant deed of trust references

24

a property located at 219 De Long Street, whereas defendants foreclosed on a property located at

25

215 De Long Street (Compl. at 4). In their motion to dismiss, Defendants U.S. Bank and

26

Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., merely state that they properly foreclosed on the

27

property located at 219 De Long Street without addressing plaintiff’s allegations (Br. at 4).

28

Plaintiff also states in his case management statement that there are at least three related actions.

1

In particular, he has a pending Chapter 13 bankruptcy action and two pending state court actions

2

against defendants Bank of America, N.A., U.S. Bank N.A., and others.

3

Defendants in this action should be prepared to discuss plaintiff’s allegations that they

4

foreclosed on the wrong property at the April 10 case management conference. In addition,

5

defendants should be prepared to discuss any related actions, including the ones listed by

6

plaintiff in his case management statement, at the conference.

7
8

IT IS SO ORDERED.

9
Dated: April 9, 2014.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2