Federal National Mortgage Association v. Lin

Filing 18

ORDER Granting 17 Stipulation to Stay All Proceedings. Signed by Judge Richard F. Boulware, II on 1/5/2018. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)

Case 2:17-cv-01533-RFB-NJK Document 17 Filed 01/04/18 Page 1 of 3

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Laurel I. Handley (NV Bar # 009576)
Jory C. Garbedian (NV Bar # 10352)
ALDRIDGE PITE, LLP
520 South 4th St., Suite 360
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
E-Mail: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiff:
Federal National Mortgage Association

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

10
11

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE
ASSOCIATION,

12

Plaintiff,

13

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO STAY
ALL PROCEEDINGS

v.

14

Case No. 2:17-cv-01533-RFB-NJK

YAN LIN, an individual,

15

Defendant.

16
17
18

Plaintiff FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (“Fannie Mae”) and

19

Defendant YAN LIN (“Lin”), by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate

20

and agree as follows:

21

1.

On May 31, 2017, Fannie Mae filed a Complaint herein challenging the facial

22

constitutionality of NRS 116.3116, as it existed prior to October 1, 2015, on the basis of due

23

process and Bourne Valley Court Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 832 F.3d 1154, 1160 (9th Cir.

24

2016). (See ECF No. 1).

25

2.

This Court has certified an issue regarding NRS 116’s notice requirement to the

26

Nevada Supreme Court in Bank of New York Mellon v. Star Hill Homeowners Association, et al,

27

Case No. 2:16-cv-02561-RFB-PAL (ECF No. 41) (hereinafter the “Certified Question”).

28
-1-

Case 2:17-cv-01533-RFB-NJK Document 17 Filed 01/04/18 Page 2 of 3

3.

1

In light of the Certified Question, this Court has stayed proceedings in a number

2

of other cases challenging the facial constitutionality of NRS 116.3116. See e.g., Wells Fargo

3

Bank, N.A. v. SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC, et al, Case No. 2:16-cv-02726-RFB-NJK (ECF No.

4

67); Federal National Mortgage Association v. Martin, Case No. 2:17-cv-00005-RFB-CWH

5

(ECF No. 22 – Minute Order); Park 1 at Summerlingate Homeowner’s Association v. Federal

6

National Mortgage Association, et al, Case No. 2:16-cv-00602-RFB-CWH (ECF No. 33 –

7

Minute Order); Bank of New York Mellon v. Star Hill Homeowners Association, et al, Case No.

8

2:16-cv-02561-RFB-PAL (ECF No. 45).
4.

9

“[T]he power to stay proceedings is incidental to the power inherent in every

10

court to control the disposition of the causes of action on its docket with economy of time and

11

effort for itself, for counsel, and for litigants.” Landis v. N. Am. Co., 299 U.S. 248, 254 (1936).

12

“A trial court may, with propriety, find it is efficient for its own docket and the fairest course for

13

the parties to enter a stay of an action before it, pending resolution of independent proceedings

14

which bear upon the case.” Leyva v. Certified Grocers of Cal., Ltd., 593 F.2d 857, 863 (9th Cir.

15

1979).

16

5.

When determining whether a stay of proceedings is appropriate, the Court

17

considers: (1) damage from the stay; (2) hardship or inequity that befalls one party more than the

18

other; and (3) the orderly course of justice. See Dependable Highway Exp., Inc. v. Navigators

19

Ins. Co., 498 F.3d 1059, 1066 (9th Cir. 2007).

20

6.

Fannie Mae and Lin agree that any damage, damage or hardship from a stay of

21

this matter is minimal at this point in time and that a decision on the Certified Question will help

22

promote an orderly disposition of one of the main issues in this case, namely the facial

23

constitutionality of NRS 116.3116.

24
25
26
27

7.

Fannie Mae and Lin agree that either party may move to lift the stay at any time if

circumstances change or as each party may deem appropriate.
8.

Accordingly, and consistent with the prior stay orders from this Court in the cases

listed in paragraph 3, Fannie Mae and Lin agree that all proceedings in the instant case, including

28
-2-

Case 2:17-cv-01533-RFB-NJK Document 17 Filed 01/04/18 Page 3 of 3

1

discovery, dispositive motions, and any other litigation or case management deadlines, are stayed

2

pending a final decision from the Nevada Supreme Court on the Certified Question.

3

IT IS SO STIPULATED AND AGREED this 4th day of January, 2018.

4

ALDRIDGE PITE, LLP

5

/s/ Jory C. Garabedian

6

8

JORY C. GARABEDIAN, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 10352
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Federal National Mortgage Association

9

HONG & HONG, PLC

7

10

/s/ Joseph Y. Hong

11

JOSEPH Y. HONG, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 5995
Attorneys for Defendant
Yan Lin

12
13
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.

16
17
U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
18
19
Dated:
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3-

January 5, 2018