Merritt et al v. Countrywide Financial Corporation et al

Filing 197

ORDER SUBMITTING 159 MOTION TO STAY STATE LAW CLAIMS WITHOUT ORAL ARGUMENT AND VACATING HEARING; CLARIFYING COURT'S SCHEDULING ORDER, re 193 , 195 . Plaintiffs are reminded that all filings must be signed by both plaintiffs. Signed by Hon. Beth Labson Freeman on 2/12/2015. (blflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/12/2015) Modified on 2/12/2015 (blflc2, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 DAVID MERRITT, et al., 7 Case No. 09-cv-01179-BLF Plaintiffs, 8 v. 9 COUNTRYWIDE FINANCIAL CORPORATION, et al., 10 Defendants. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 ORDER SUBMITTING MOTION WITHOUT ORAL ARGUMENT AND VACATING HEARING; CLARIFYING COURT’S SCHEDULING ORDER [Re: ECF 159, 193] 12 The Motion to Stay State Law Claims, ECF 159, that was noticed for hearing on February 13 14 19, 2015 is hereby SUBMITTED without oral argument; the hearing is VACATED.1 See Civ. 15 L.R. 7-1(b). In response to Plaintiffs’ “Request for Correction/Amendment of Court’s January 30, 2015 16 17 Order,” ECF 193, the Court interprets defendant Angelo Mozilo’s joinder, ECF 181, of the 18 Countrywide Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss as just that—he joins those motions as a moving 19 party. Plaintiffs therefore need not separately respond to Mr. Mozilo’s joinder notice. Plaintiffs are reminded that all filings must be signed by both plaintiffs. If Mrs. Salma 20 21 Merritt fails to sign future filings, she will not be considered a party to the filing and risks having 22 her claims dismissed. IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 24 Dated: February 12, 2015 ______________________________________ BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge 25 26 27 28 1 Defendants’ motion to continue the hearing date, ECF 194, is DENIED as moot.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?