Moussavi et al v. JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge George Jarrod Hazel on 4/6/2017. (kns, Deputy Clerk)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURl:'
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
SEYED MOUSSA VI, et :11.,
Case No.: G.IH-15-209-t
,II' MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,
The Court previously
19. 2016. dismissing
Motion for Extension
with a fourth count
23. 2016. More than five months passed without
and the Court issued an Order on March 3. 2017. dismissing
of Time to Amend and Replace Counsel.
likd the presently
ECI' No. 19. Plaintiffs'
ECI' No. 22. and a Motion to Expedite
ECF No. 24. No hearing is necessary.
Motion for an Extension
ECI' No. 18. On March 10. 2017. Plaintiffs
also liled a Motion to Withdraw
Opinion and Order in this casc on August
the case with prejudice.
Plaintiffs were given fourteen days to lile an amended complaint
were then granted an extension
issued a Memorandum
three counts in Plaintimi
See Loe. R. 105.6 (D. Md. 2(16). Plaintiffs'
is denied. and the remaining
motions are denied as moot.
Seyed and Mary Moussavi
liled a lour-count
in this Court
Morl!an Chase Bank N.A .. Chase l.oan Servieinl!. and Hudson City
Savings Bank. alleging i) mortgage fi'aud. ii) common law fraud. iii) violation of the Maryland
Consumer Protection Act. Md. Code. Com. Law
Debt Collection Practices Act. 15 U.S.c.
and iv) violation of the Fair
ECF No. I. The Court issued an Opinion
on August 19.2016. dismissing the first three counts without prejudice. and the fi.Hlrthcount with
prejudice. ECI' No. 14. The Court allowed Plaintiffs fourteen days to tile an Amended
Complaint. ECI' No. 15. The parties jointly moved li)[ a three-week extension of time on
September 2.2016. stating that ''It]he parties are discussing a potcntial resolution of this matter:'
and ..[tJhe parties believe the requested extension will facilitate these discussions:'
ECI' No. 16
at 1. The Court issued a Paperless Order granting the motion and extended the deadline lilr
Plaintiffs to tile an Amended Complaint to September 23.2016. ECF No. 17. Alier more than
five months elapsed without the tiling of an Amended Complaint. an additional request fi)]"
extension of time. or any activity of any kind on the docket. the Court dismissed the case with
prejudice on March 3. 2017. ECI' No. 18."
Alier the Court's final order was entered. Plaintif1"sfiled a motion on March 10.2017.
requesting an "extension of time to amend and replace counsel:' Eel' No. 19. Plaintiffs stated
that they had originally sought an extension of time "because it was expected that the parties
would either settle this case or amend the complaint. if settlement negotiations fail:' ECI' No. 19
further asserted in their Motion that the purpose of the settlement negotiations were to
obtain a loan modification li'om Defendants. but "despite Moussavi's counsel's numerous eftilrts
to pressure the [Djefendants to be expeditious with their loan modification process because of
litigation. the Defendants took well over 6 months to consider Moussavi fill' a loan
1 Pin cites to documents
tiled on the Court"s electronic filing system (CM/ECF) refer 10 the page numbers generated
bv that $vstC1l1.
l:fhe (\;1lI1"S chambers ~l11ailedthe parties on September 26.2016 and was informed that the parties were still in
settlement negotiations. ECF No. 19 at I. Nothing was filed on the docket howe vcr.
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?