STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXTEND DEADLINE FOR YORKSHIRE MANOR ASSOCIATION TO ANSWER OR OTHERWISE RESPOND TO COMPLAINT;

[Fifth Request]

CAM FERENBACH, Magistrate Judge.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between Plaintiff, The Bank of New York Mellon fka The Bank of New York, as Trustee for the Certificateholders of CWABS Inc. Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2005-16 ("Plaintiff"), by and through its counsel, McCarthy & Holthus, LLP, and Defendant, Yorkshire Manor Association (the "Association"), by and through its counsel Kern & Associates, Ltd., to extend the deadline for the Association to answer or otherwise respond to Plaintiff's Complaint up-to-and-including October 25, 2017.

Pursuant to the prior Stipulation and Order to Extend ("SAO to Extend") Deadline for Yorkshire Manor Association to Answer or Otherwise Respond to Complaint (Fourth Request) filed August 30, 2017 (ECF #21), the current deadline for the Association to file its answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint is September 25, 2017. Plaintiff and the Association (collectively referred to as the "Parties") again stipulate and agree to extend the deadline for the Association to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint up-to-and-including October 25, 2017.

The Parties have been in settlement negotiations, and counsel for the Parties have reached a tentative agreement to settle this matter pending confirmation by Plaintiff's counsel with his client. On or about September 1, 2017, however, the prior servicer (Ditech) for Plaintiff was changed to Bayview Loan Servicing, and Plaintiff's counsel is trying to confirm the tentative settlement with the new servicer. The new servicer has tentatively agreed to settlement terms based on what little information it has at this time; however, it is still engaged in the onboarding process for this loan, is attempting to confirm the numbers as presented, obtain the entirety of the loan file from Ditech as well as finalize the form of settlement so that it is acceptable to its own title insurer as well as the beneficiary of this loan in order to avoid a duplicative declaratory relief action in order to obtain the necessary title insurance. Once this process is completed, Counsel for Plaintiff believes matter should be settled in short order. At this point the service transfer is the only thing holding up settlement. In the continued interest of conserving the time and resources of this Court as well as the Parties hereto, the Parties once again agree and stipulate that the Association may have an additional thirty (30) days in which to answer or otherwise respond in order for Plaintiff's counsel verify settlement terms with the new servicer.

This is the Parties' fifth request for an extension of time with respect to this matter. Given the ongoing administrative changes with Plaintiff's servicer and the necessity of counsel for Plaintiff to confirm settlement terms with the new servicer, good cause exists for this additional extension. This request is not intended to cause delay or prejudice to any party. The Parties respectfully request the Court's indulgence in this regard.

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.