From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clark v. Jpmorgan Chase & Co.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California
Jun 25, 2014
14-cv-00419 VC (N.D. Cal. Jun. 25, 2014)

Opinion

          JOINT REQUEST TO CONTINUE HEARING ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AND TO CONTINUE RELATED BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

          VINCE CHHABRIA, District Judge.

         Plaintiff Barbara Clark, fka Barbara Hopkins ("Plaintiff') and Defendants JPMorgan Chase & Co., Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corporation, Chase Home Finance, LLC, and JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. (collectively "Defendants", and together with Plaintiff the "Parties"), by and through their attorneys of record, hereby jointly request that the Court continue the hearing on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 21) currently set on this Court's calendar on July 24, 2014 to July 31, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. The Parties additionally request that the Court approve the following briefing schedule for the remaining briefing related to that Motion:

         • Plaintiff's opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss shall be due on or before July 17, 2014;

         • Defendants' reply to the Motion to Dismiss shall be due on or before July 24, 2014.

         The Parties request a continuance of the hearing and briefing schedule to allow them an opportunity to explore settlement possibilities and to accommodate a conflict in Plaintiff's counsel's schedule on the currently scheduled hearing date.

          Amy M Spicer, MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP San Francisco, CA

          JOSEPH DUFFY, MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP Los Angeles, CA Attorneys for Defendants JPMORGAN CHASE & CO., CHASE MANHATTAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION, CHASE HOME FINANCE, LLC, and JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.

          Michele M. Poteracke LAW OFFICE OF MICHELE M. POTERACKE Attorney for Plaintiff Barbara Clark, fka Barbara Hopkins

          This is the Parties' first request to continue the motion to dismiss hearing and related briefing schedule. The Parties previously stipulated to extend the time for Defendants to respond to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint by thirty days.


         This request will not impact any other deadlines set in the case.

         [PROPOSED] ORDER

         Pursuant to Stipulation, IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Clark v. Jpmorgan Chase & Co.

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California
Jun 25, 2014
14-cv-00419 VC (N.D. Cal. Jun. 25, 2014)
Case details for

Clark v. Jpmorgan Chase & Co.

Case Details

Full title:BARBARA CLARK, fka BARBARA HOPKINS Plaintiff, v. JPMORGAN CHASE & CO., a…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California

Date published: Jun 25, 2014

Citations

14-cv-00419 VC (N.D. Cal. Jun. 25, 2014)