JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Sierra Pacific Mortgage Company, Inc., 2:13-cv-1397-JAM-KJN. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20160301720
Visitors: 23
Filed: Feb. 29, 2016
Latest Update: Feb. 29, 2016
Summary: ORDER KENDALL J. NEWMAN , Magistrate Judge . On February 25, 2016, this case was before the undersigned to address defendant Sierra Pacific Mortgage Company, Inc.'s ("defendant") motion to compel JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. ("plaintiff") to produce the settlement agreements it entered into with the Federal National Mortgage Association ("Fannie Mae") and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("Freddie Mac") in October of 2013. (ECF No. 107.) Also before the undersigned was plaintiff's m
Summary: ORDER KENDALL J. NEWMAN , Magistrate Judge . On February 25, 2016, this case was before the undersigned to address defendant Sierra Pacific Mortgage Company, Inc.'s ("defendant") motion to compel JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. ("plaintiff") to produce the settlement agreements it entered into with the Federal National Mortgage Association ("Fannie Mae") and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("Freddie Mac") in October of 2013. (ECF No. 107.) Also before the undersigned was plaintiff's mo..
More
ORDER
KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.
On February 25, 2016, this case was before the undersigned to address defendant Sierra Pacific Mortgage Company, Inc.'s ("defendant") motion to compel JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. ("plaintiff") to produce the settlement agreements it entered into with the Federal National Mortgage Association ("Fannie Mae") and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation ("Freddie Mac") in October of 2013. (ECF No. 107.) Also before the undersigned was plaintiff's motion to compel defendant to produce documents it obtained in response to third party subpoenas it served on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (ECF No. 113.) Attorney Gregory Sudbury appeared for plaintiff. Attorney Jonathan Jenkins appeared for defendant.
Based on the parties' motions, the parties' joint statements, other relevant filings, and oral arguments, and for the reasons discussed below and on the record during the hearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Defendant's motion to compel the October 2013 settlement agreements between plaintiff and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (ECF No. 107) is DENIED. As discussed on the record during the hearing on this matter, the declarations plaintiff filed in support of its opposition to defendant's motion clearly demonstrate that the settlement agreements at issue are not relevant within the meaning of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1).
2. Plaintiff's motion to compel (ECF No. 113) is GRANTED with no opposition from defendant. To the extent the documents responsive to plaintiff's request have not already been produced, defendant shall promptly produce all responsive documents by no later than March 1, 2016.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
