May v. Washington Mutual Brokerage Holdings, Inc. et al

Filing 70

ORDER RE: DEFENDANT FDIC'S MOTIONS TO DISMISS AS TO PLAINTIFF'S STATE LAW CLAIMS re 69 Stipulation. This Order VACATES the Court's prior Order regarding Plaintiff's state law claims against Defendant FDIC. Upon completion of the briefing, the FDIC's Motions as to Plaintiff's state law claims will be taken under submission without oral argument unless otherwise ordered by the Court. Please see Order for further specifics. Signed by Judge James Ware on 5/3/2010. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/3/2010)

RE: DEFENDANT FDIC'S ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT MOTIONS TO DISMISS AS TO AS FDIC'S MOTIONS TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF'S STATE THE PARTIES' MOOT IN LIGHT OF LAW CLAIMS STIPULATION; SETTING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AS TO ALL PARITES FOR MAY 24, 2010

A

LI

ER

N

C F DE S T I C T O IR R C N F D IS T IC T O R

FO

A

mes Wa Judge Ja

LI

FO
re

Judge J

R NIA

S DISTRICT TE C TA S DISTRICT E C AT T D RDERE IS SO O IT DERED SO OR ED IT IS IFI S s WaD AmeMO re a

RT U O RT U O

UNIT ED

S

UNIT ED

S

R NIA

NO

RT

NO

H

RT

H

On May 3, 2010, the Court issued an Order approving the Plaintiff and Defendant FDIC's Stipulation re: Dismissal as to the First Cause of Action for violation of TILA against Defendant FDIC. (Docket Item No. 69.) In its Order, the Court presumed that the Stipulation also covered state law claims against the FDIC because Plaintiff had not filed its Opposition to the FDIC's pending Motions to Dismiss. The Court mistakenly calculated that Plaintiff's Opposition was due on April 13, 2010 rather than May 3, 2010. This Order VACATES the Court's prior Order regarding Plaintiff's state law claims against Defendant FDIC. Upon completion of the briefing, the FDIC's Motions as to Plaintiff's state law claims will be taken under submission without oral argument unless otherwise ordered by the Court. See Civ. L.R. 7-1(b)

Dated: May 3, 2010

______________________________ JAMES WARE United States District Judge

In light of this Order, all pending Motions to Dismiss by Defendant FDIC are DENIED as moot as to Plaintiff's TILA claim against the FDIC. (Docket Item Nos. 55, 61, 62.) However, the Court notes that Plaintiff has not filed any Opposition to address the FDIC's Motions as to the state law claims-the Opposition was due on April 13, 2010. Since there is no Opposition by Plaintiff, the Court presumes that this Stipulation covers the state law claims against the FDIC as well. The Court sets a Case Management Conference for all parties on May 24, 2010 at 10 a.m. On or before May 14, 2010, the parties shall file a Joint Case Management Statement. The Statement shall include, among other things, a good faith discovery plan with a proposed date for the close of all discovery, and an update on the parties' settlement efforts, if any.

Dated: May 3, 2010

_____________________________ JAMES WARE United States District Judge