Ditech Financial LLC et al v. TBR I, LLC et al

Filing 43

ORDER denying 41 Plaintiffs' Motion to Stay. Discovery due by 2/16/2018. Motions due by 3/16/2018. Proposed Joint Pretrial Order due by 4/27/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge William G. Cobb on 8/31/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - HJ)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 DITECH FINANCIAL LLC F/K/A GREEN TREE SERVICING LLC and FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) STONEFIELD II HOMEOWNERS ) ASSOCIATION, AIRMOTIVE ) INVESTMENTS, LLC, ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________ ) 3:16-cv-00227-MMD-WGC ORDER Re: ECF No. 41 16 Before the court is the Motion for Partial Stay of Plaintiffs Ditech Financial LLC and Federal 17 National Mortgage Association (Plaintiffs) (ECF No. 41). No opposition has been filed. 18 The court is aware of the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 40). No 19 response has yet been filed by any of the other parties but according to CM/ECF, responses are not due 20 until September 5, 2017. Any reply memoranda would presumably not be lodged with the court until 21 mid to late September, at which time the motion would become ripe for decision by District Judge 22 Miranda Du. 23 As the parties are presumably aware, literally hundreds of these “H.O.A. Foreclosure” cases are 24 pending on the docket of the Northern Division for the District of Nevada. In view of Judge Du’s 25 extremely congested docket, it is unlikely Judge Du will be able to address the pending motion (which 26 as noted above is not yet even ripe) in the immediate future. If, hypothetically, the motions were denied 27 and the parties were to then submit a Discovery Plan and Scheduling order, a discovery deadline would 28 likely not be established before fall of 2018 or even winter of 2019. 1 The court is not unsympathetic to the prospect of having to undertake discovery on a case which 2 might potentially be dismissed. On the other hand, the court does not view this case as being discovery 3 intensive. It is nonetheless the court’s obligation to manage its docket and ensure this and other cases 4 do not languish. Plaintiffs’ Motion (ECF No. 41) is DENIED. 5 This court has previously entered a Scheduling Order (ECF No. 23). Under that order, the 6 deadline to complete discovery is set to expire on September 11, 2017. The court recognizes, however, 7 that the amended complaint was not filed until June 16, 2017 (ECF No. 27) and that answers, 8 counterclaims and answers to counterclaims have been variously lodged up to August 9, 2017 (see, e.g., 9 ECF No. 39). 10 Therefore, the court will extend the existing deadlines, as follows: 11 • • • • • 12 13 14 Discovery in this action shall be completed on or before February 16, 2018. Disclosures of expert testimony are due on or before December 15, 2017. Disclosure of rebuttal experts are due on or before January 12, 2018. Dispositive motions shall be filed and served no later than March 16, 2018. The Joint Pre-Trial Order shall be filed no later than April 27, 2018. If a dispositive motion is filed, the Joint Pre-Trial Order shall be due thirty (30) days after a decision on the dispositive motion. 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16 DATED: August 31, 2017. 17 ____________________________________ WILLIAM G. COBB UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?