Chan et al v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Filing 31

STIPULATION AND ORDER re 30 Stipulation to Extend Stay of Action Pending Loan Modification Review filed by JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Case stayed. Case Management Statement due by 1/19/2017. Initial Case Management Conference reset for 1/26/2017 09:30 AM in Courtroom 5, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 10/20/16. (bpf, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/20/2016)

1
2
3
4
5
6

Joseph E. Addiego III (CA SBN 169522)
John D. Freed (CA SBN 261518)
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
505 Montgomery Street, Suite 800
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone:
[phone]
Facsimile:
[phone]
Email:
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.

7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

11
WAYNE CHAN, et al.,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

12
Plaintiffs,
13
v.
14
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,
15
Defendant.
16
17

Case No. 16-cv-02497-EMC
STIPULATION TO EXTEND STAY OF
ACTION PENDING LOAN
MODIFICATION REVIEW;
[PROPOSED] ORDER

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
STIPULATION TO EXTEND STAY OF ACTION PENDING LOAN MODIFICATION REVIEW

1

WHEREAS, on April 6, 2016, Plaintiffs filed this action against Defendant JPMorgan

2

Chase Bank, N.A. (“Chase”) in the California Superior Court, San Mateo County;

3

WHEREAS, May 9, 2016, Chase removed this action to this Court;

4

WHEREAS on July 21, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”);

5

WHEREAS, on July 14, 2016, Plaintiffs submitted a loan modification application to

6
7
8
9

Chase for consideration;
WHEREAS, on July 22, 2016, the parties stipulated to stay this action for 90 days pending
the outcome of Plaintiffs’ loan modification review;
WHEREAS, on July 22, 2016, the Court entered the stay, and ordered the parties to submit

10

a status report within 90 days, advising the Court of (a) the status of Plaintiffs’ loan modification

11

application; and the (b) the parties’ positions on whether the stay should remain in force or active

12

litigation resumed.

13

WHEREAS, although Plaintiffs’ loan modification review process remains ongoing, the

14

parties remain optimistic that this litigation may be resolved informally in the event Chase grants

15

Plaintiffs’ application for loan modification.

16
17
18
19
20

NOW THEREFORE, Plaintiffs and Chase HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE AS
FOLLOWS:
1.

The stay entered by the Court on July 22, 2016 shall remain in force to allow loan

modification discussions to continue.
2.

Within ninety (90) days of the Court’s entry of this stipulation, the parties shall file

21

a joint status report indicating (a) the status of Plaintiffs’ loan modification application, and (b) the

22

parties’ positions on whether the stay should remain in place or should be lifted and active

23

litigation resumed.

24
25

3.

Chase shall have twenty (20) days from the date of any order lifting the stay to

answer, move to dismiss, or otherwise respond to the FAC.

26
27
28
2
STIPULATION TO EXTEND STAY OF ACTION PENDING LOAN MODIFICATION REVIEW

1

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

2

DATED: October 19, 2016
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
Joseph E. Addiego III
John D. Freed

3
4

By:/s/ John D. Freed
John D. Freed

5
6

Attorneys for Defendant
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.

7

MELLEN LAW FIRM
Eunji Cho

8
9

By: /s/ Eunji Cho
Eunji Cho

10
11

One Embarcadero Center, Fifth Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

12
13
14
15

CERTIFICATION OF CONCURRENCE

16
17

Pursuant to L.R. 5-1, I hereby attest that Eunji Cho, counsel for Plaintiffs Wayne and

18

Gladys Chan, has provided her concurrence in the electronic filing of the foregoing document

19

entitled STIPULATION TO EXTEND STAY OF ACTION PENDING LOAN MODIFICATION

20

REVIEW.

21
22
23

/s/ John D. Freed
John D. Freed

24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION TO EXTEND STAY OF ACTION PENDING LOAN MODIFICATION REVIEW

[PROPOSED] ORDER

1
2

Presently before the Court is the parties’ Stipulation to Extend Stay of Action Pending

3

Loan Modification Review. Good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS the stipulation to permit

4

the parties to pursue loan modification as an alternative to litigation. Accordingly, the stay

5

imposed on July 22, 2016 remains in place.

6

On or before ninety (90) days after the Court’s issuance of this Order, the parties shall

7

submit a joint status report advising the Court of (a) the status of Plaintiff’s loan modification

8

application, and (b) the parties’ positions on whether the stay should remain in force or active

9

litigation resumed.

10
11

Chase shall have twenty (20) days from the date of any order lifting the stay in this case to
answer, move to dismiss, or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint.

12
13

SO ORDERED . The CMC is reset from 11/10/16 to 1/26/17 at 9:30 a.m.
A joint CMC statement shall be filed by 1/19/17.

S DISTRICT
_________________________________
TE
C

16

United

ED
ORDER
T IS SO DIFIED
I
States District Judge
AS MO
hen

.C
dward M
Judge E

RT

ER

19

A

H

18

LI

NO

17

R NIA

Hon. Edward M. Chen
UNIT
ED

15

RT
U
O

TA

FO

Date: _____________________
10/20/16

S

14

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
STIPULATION TO EXTEND STAY OF ACTION PENDING LOAN MODIFICATION REVIEW

C