Filed: Oct. 31, 2017
Latest Update: Oct. 31, 2017
Summary: STIPULATED REQUEST TO MODIFY INITIAL PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER; ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES, AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: Plaintiff Maybelle San Miguel ("Plaintiff") and Defendants Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. ("SPS") and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A, as Trustee for Structured Asset Mortgage Investments II Inc. Bear Stearns Mortgage Funding Trust 2006-AR5, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-AR5's (erroneously sued as "Wells Fargo Bank, N
Summary: STIPULATED REQUEST TO MODIFY INITIAL PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER; ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES, AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: Plaintiff Maybelle San Miguel ("Plaintiff") and Defendants Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. ("SPS") and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A, as Trustee for Structured Asset Mortgage Investments II Inc. Bear Stearns Mortgage Funding Trust 2006-AR5, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-AR5's (erroneously sued as "Wells Fargo Bank, N...
More
STIPULATED REQUEST TO MODIFY INITIAL PRETRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER; ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES, AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
Plaintiff Maybelle San Miguel ("Plaintiff") and Defendants Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. ("SPS") and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A, as Trustee for Structured Asset Mortgage Investments II Inc. Bear Stearns Mortgage Funding Trust 2006-AR5, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-AR5's (erroneously sued as "Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.") ("Wells Fargo") (collectively, "Defendants"), hereby recite and stipulate, subject to the Court's approval as provided for herein, as follows:
RECITALS
1. On November 17, 2016, Plaintiff filed this action in the Sacramento County Superior Court. ECF No. 1. On December 28, 2016, SPS removed this action to this Court. Id.
2. On March 9, 2017, the Court issued a Pretrial Scheduling Order. ECF No. 10. The following deadlines apply pursuant to this Order:
a. October 31, 2017 deadline to complete fact discovery;
b. December 28, 2017 deadline to designate expert witnesses; and
c. April 19, 2018 deadline to file dispositive motions.
3. On March 9, 2017, Defendants filed its Motion To Dismiss. ECF No. 11.
4. On May 12, 2017, the Court entered a Minute Order stating that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss was submitted without oral argument.
5. As of October 2017, the Court has not ruled on the Motion to Dismiss. The pleadings are not yet "at issue." Despite this, Defendants have engaged in some, but not all, of their discovery given that the allegations ultimately at issue in the case may change.
6. The parties submit that good cause exists to continue for 120-days the October 31, 2017 deadline to complete fact discovery1 because, in an effort to limit costs and to litigate this action in the most efficient means possible, the certain fact discovery while the Court was considering Defendants' Motion To Dismiss has been delayed.
7. The trial date is set for October 1, 2018. ECF No. 10. Continuing the fact discovery deadline for 120-days and expert designation deadline for 90-days does not appear to interfere with the District Court's calendar.
8. Neither party has previously submitted a request to continue any dates in the Initial Pretrial Scheduling Order.
STIPULATIONS
The Parties stipulate to a 120-day continuance of the October 31, 2017 fact discovery deadline; and 90-day continuance of the expert designation deadline.
Plaintiff and Defendants so stipulate.
ORDER
Pursuant to the terms of the foregoing stipulation, the Court extends the fact discovery deadline 120-days: from October 31, 2017 to February 28, 2018. The Court also extends the expert designation deadline 90-days: from December 28, 2017 to March 28, 2018.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
