Bowland v. Karamehmedovic et al

Filing 20

ORDER Setting Briefing Schedule on Motion to Dismiss. Opposition due June 3, 2011. Reply due June 10, 2011. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on 5/20/2011. (lhklc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/20/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 SAN JOSE DIVISION United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) VANDA KARAMEHMEDOVIC, an individual; ) NEWCAL FINANCIAL GROUP, INC., a ) California corporation; WORLD SAVINGS ) BANK, FSB, a California corporation; ) WACHOVIA MORTGAGE, FSB, a North ) Carolina corporation; WELLS FARGO BANK, ) N.A., a corporation and DOES 1 through 100, ) inclusive, ) Defendants. ) ) DARLENE BOWLAND, Case No.: 11-cv-01667-LHK ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE Defendant Wells Fargo Bank N.A. (successor by merger to Wachovia Mortgage, FSB, 20 formerly known as World Savings Bank, FSB) (“Wells Fargo”) has filed a motion to dismiss 21 Plaintiff’s complaint. The motion is set for hearing on September 1, 2011 at 1:30 p.m. The Court 22 hereby sets a briefing schedule for Defendant’s motion: 23 Opposition: due June 3, 2011 24 Reply: due June 10, 2011 25 If possible, the Court will resolve the motion to dismiss on the papers in advance of the 26 hearing date. The case was removed from state court by Defendant Wells Fargo on the basis of a 27 single federal claim (claim 1, for violation of the Truth in Lending Act or TILA, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 28 et seq.). It appears, based on the Complaint, that TILA rescission may be unavailable because the 1 Case No.: 11-CV-01667-LHK ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON MOTION TO DISMISS 1 property has already been sold. See 15 U.S.C. § 1635 (“An obligor’s right of rescission shall 2 expire three years after the date of consummation of the transaction or upon the sale of the 3 property, whichever occurs first.”). It also appears that Plaintiff’s claim for TILA damages is 4 barred by the one-year statute of limitations. 15 U.S.C. § 1640(e). Plaintiff’s Opposition should 5 address these issues and whether she can allege facts to support equitable tolling of her TILA 6 damages claim. If the Court finds that Plaintiff cannot state a federal claim, or if the Plaintiff 7 voluntarily dismisses the TILA claim, the Court will dismiss the TILA claim and remand the 8 remaining state claims. 9 IT IS SO ORDERED. United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 Dated: May 20, 2011 _________________________________ LUCY H. KOH United States District Judge 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Case No.: 11-CV-01667-LHK ORDER REGARDING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON MOTION TO DISMISS

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?