Opinion
2:15-cv-00991-MMD-PAL 2:15-cv-01193-MMD-GWF 2:15- cv-01204-MMD-PAL 2:15- cv-01308-MMD-NJK 2:15- cv-01597-MMD-NJK 2:15- cv-01705-MMD-PAL 2:15- cv-01903-MMD-PAL 2:15- cv-02026-MMD-CWH 2:16- cv-00066-MMD-GWF 2:16- cv-00383-MMD-NJK 2:16- cv-00424-MMD-PAL 2:16- cv-00438-MMD-VCF 2:16- cv-00467-MMD-CWH 2:16- cv-00536-MMD-VCF 2:16- cv-00605-MMD-VCF 2:16- cv-00660-MMD-CWH 2:16- cv-00703-MMD-GWF 2:16- cv-00845-MMD-NJK 3:15- cv-00240-MMD-VPC 3:15- cv-00328-MMD-WGC 3:15- cv-00349-MMD-VPC 3:15- cv-00375-MMD-VPC 3:15- cv-00477-MMD-VPC 3:15- cv-00518-MMD-WGC 3:16- cv-00097-MMD-WGC 3:16- cv-00135-MMD-VPC 3:16- cv-00146-MMD-WGC 3:16- cv-00158-MMD-WGC 3:16- cv-00183-MMD-VPC 3:16- cv-00188-MMD-VPC 3:16- cv-00194-MMD-WGC 3:16- cv-00413-MMD-WGC 3:16- cv-00446-MMD-VPC 2:15- cv-00112-MMD-CWH 2:16- cv-00246-MMD-CWH 2:16- cv-00404-MMD-NJK 2:16- cv-00691-MMD-VCF 2:16- cv-00962-MMD-CWH 2:16- cv-01069-MMD-VCF 2:16- cv-01637-MMD-GWF 2:16- cv-01719-MMD-CWH 3:15- cv-00291-MMD-WGC 3:15- cv-00297-MMD-WGC 3:15- cv-00333-MMD-VPC 3:15- cv-00502-MMD-WGC 3:16- cv-00004-MMD-WGC 3:16- cv-00120-MMD-WGC 3:16- cv-00154-MMD-VPC 3:16- cv-00192-MMD-VPC 3:16- cv-00227-MMD-WGC 3:16- cv-00307-MMD-WGC 3:16- cv-00351-MMD-VPC
01-19-2017
Goldsmith v. U.S. Bank, NA Bank of America v. Woodcrest HOA Wells Fargo v. Tides I HOA Nationstar v. Aurora Canyon HOA Nationstar v. Shara Sunrise HOA Nationstar v. Augusta Belford and Ellingwood HOA 1290 Village Walk Trust v. Bank of America Bank of New York Mellon v. Log Cabin Manor HOA US Bank v. Ski Way Trust Bank of New York Mellon v. Imagination North Bank of America v. Green Valley South Bank of America v. Inspirada Community Assoc. Bank of America v. Sunrise Ridge Deutsche Bank v. Independence II HOA Bank of America v. Inspirada Community Assoc. Bank of America v. Peccole Ranch Community Assoc. Nationstar v. SFR Investments Pool Bank of Amierca v. Treo North and South HOA Wells Fargo v. SFR Investments Pool US Bank v. Thunder Properties PNC Bank v. Wingfield Springs Community Assoc. Nationstar v. Highland Ranch HOA US Bank v. White Lake Ranch Assoc. GMAT Legal Title Trust v. SFR Investments Pool Bank of New York Mellon v. Thunder Properties Bank of America v. North Truckee Townhomes HOA Bank of America v. Grand Sierra Resort Unit Owners Bank of America v. Tenaya Creek HOA Bank of America v. Southwest Meadows HOA Bank of America v. The Siena HOA Ditech Financial v. Highland Ranch HOA Bank of America v. Aspen Meadows US Bank v. Fairway Pines Assoc. LN Mgmt v. Gelgotas Bank of New York Mellon v. Saticoy Bay Bank of America v. Southern Highlands Bank of America v. Spanish Bay HOA Bank of America v. Aliante Master Assoc. Wells Fargo v. SFT Investments Pool Nationstar v. Summit Hills HOA US Bank v. SFR Investments Pool Bank of America v. Rainbow Bend HOA Green Tree Servicing v. Rainbow Bend HOA Countrywide v. Willow Hills Commons HOA Bank of America v. Huffaker Hills Deutsche Bank v. Williamsburg Townehomes HOA Bank of America v. Esplanade at Damonte Ranch HOA Bank of America v. Highland Ranch HOA Bank of America v. Yorkshire Manor I HOA Ditech Financial v. TBR I US Bank v. Casoleil HOA Ditech Financial v. Dorado HOA
ORDER LIFTING STAY
The Court sua sponte imposed a temporary stay in the above referenced cases because of the potential impact of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision in Bourne Valley Court Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA, 832 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2016). The stay order provides for the stay to be in effect until the mandate is issued in Bourne Valley. The Ninth Circuit issued the mandate on December 14, 2016, after denying a petition for en banc hearing and a petition for a stay pending the resolution of a petition for writ of certiorari. Bourne Valley Court Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA, No. 15-15233 (9th Cir. Dec. 14, 2016) (mandate). Furthermore, the appellee specifically cited this Court's stay order in its request for a stay of the Ninth Circuit's mandate, arguing that delaying the mandate would promote efficiency. Nevertheless, the Ninth Circuit denied appellee's motion. Thus, Bourne Valley's holding is binding precedent unless and until it is reversed, though such finality may not occur for months. Under these circumstances, the Court finds that a continued stay would not promote fairness or "secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination" of these stayed cases as mandated under Fed. R. Civ. P. 1.
Accordingly, the temporary stay will be lifted. Pending motions that were denied without prejudice when the stay was imposed may be refiled within thirty (30) days.
DATED THIS 19th day of January 2017.
/s/_________
MIRANDA M. DU
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE