From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Singh v. Citimortgage, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION
Aug 11, 2011
CASE NO. CV11-00793-KJM-GGH (E.D. Cal. Aug. 11, 2011)

Opinion

CASE NO. CV11-00793-KJM-GGH

08-11-2011

BALBIR SINGH, an individual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. CITIMORTGAGE, INC., a member of CITIGROUP, INC., and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive Defendants.

STONEBARGER LAW, APC Richard D. Lambert Gene Stonebarger Richard D. Lambert Attorneys for Plaintiff Balbir Singh MAYER BROWN LLP Steven E. Rich Attorneys for Defendant CitiMortgage, Inc.


Gene J. Stonebarger, State Bar No. 209461

Richard D. Lambert, State Bar No. 251148

STONEBARGER LAW

A Professional Corporation

Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Putative Class

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR

STAY PENDING MDL

DETERMINATION

WHEREAS, on or about March 10, 2011, Balbir Singh ("Plaintiff") commenced a civil action in the Eastern District of California entitled Balbir Singh v. CitiMortgage, Inc., Case No. CV11-00793-KJM-GGH;

WHEREAS, CitiMortgage, Inc. ("Defendant") filed a Motion with the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ("JPML") on June 10, 2011 seeking transfer and consolidation or coordination of Plaintiff's action along with ten (10) cases filed against Defendant alleging claims similar to those made by Plaintiff in his action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 ("Defendant's Transfer Motion");

WHEREAS, Defendant subsequently filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint on June 15, 2011;

WHEREAS, Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is due on or before August 31, 2011 and Defendant's Reply brief is due on or before September 7, 2011;

WHEREAS, the JPML will likely hold a hearing on Defendant's Transfer Motion on September 27, 2011;

WHEREAS, both Plaintiff and Defendant feel that consolidation or coordination in one court is appropriate for these actions, and there are no objections to the JPML centralizing Plaintiff's case and the other actions before a single court;

WHEREAS, both Plaintiff and Defendant agree that a stay pending the JPML's decision on Defendant's Petition is appropriate to preserve the parties' and the Court's resources;

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the Plaintiff and Defendant, through their respective counsel and subject to the Court's approval that:

1. All pending dates in this matter, including but not limited to all dates and hearings related to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, are stayed pending a ruling by the JPML on Defendant's Transfer Motion; and

2. If Defendant's Transfer Motion is denied, Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days from the denial of the Transfer Motion to file an Opposition to Defendant's pending Motion to Dismiss, and the parties shall inform the Court that a new Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference should be issued based on the Court's availability. IT IS SO STIPULATED, THROUGH COUNSEL OF RECORD.

STONEBARGER LAW, APC

Richard D. Lambert

Gene Stonebarger

Richard D. Lambert

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Balbir Singh

MAYER BROWN LLP

Steven E. Rich

Attorneys for Defendant

CitiMortgage, Inc.
PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

__________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Singh v. Citimortgage, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION
Aug 11, 2011
CASE NO. CV11-00793-KJM-GGH (E.D. Cal. Aug. 11, 2011)
Case details for

Singh v. Citimortgage, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:BALBIR SINGH, an individual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION

Date published: Aug 11, 2011

Citations

CASE NO. CV11-00793-KJM-GGH (E.D. Cal. Aug. 11, 2011)