Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 1 of 23 Page ID #:704

1 COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP
2 JOHN J. STOIA, JR. (141757) THEODORE J. PINTAR (131372)
3 LESLIE E. HURST (178432) COTY R. MILLER (255703)
4 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101-3301
5 Telephone: 619/231-1058 619/231-7423 (fax)
6 johns@csgrr.com tedp@csgrr.com
7 lesIieh@csgrr.com cmiller@csgrr.com
8 RODDY KLEIN & RYAN
9 GARY KLEIN 727 Atlantic Avenue, 2nd Floor
10 Boston, MA 02111-2810 Telephone: 617/357-5500
11 617/357-5030 (fax) klein@roddykleinryan.com
12 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

_----~mG'lditional counsel appear on signature page.]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

DO B. PAYARES,1. ZINNIA ZALEZ, AND GREuORY KER,

No. CV-07-05540-AG(ANx) CLASS ACTION

Plaintiffs,

FIRST AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

.6';
L_----:-~~SE BANK U.S.A., N.A., AND 22 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,

23

Defendants.

24

25

26

27

28

Demand For Jury Trial
j'
"" .

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 2 of 23 Page ID #:705

1

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2

1. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.c. §1331, which gives this

I

3 Court original jurisdiction over civil actions arising under federal law.

I
I

I"

4

2. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.c. 1391(b) because a

I

5 substantial part of the events giving rise to plaintiffs' and the Class's claims occurred

6 in this District.

7

INTRODUCTION

8

3. Plaintiffs Alfredo B. Payares ("Payares"), Zinnia Gonzalez ("Gonzalez")

9 and Gregory Walker ("Walker") (collectively, "plaintiffs"), by and through their

10 attorneys, bring this action against Chase Bank U.S.A., N.A. and JPMorgan Chase

11 Bank, N.A. (collectively "Chase" or "defendants") seeking redress for racially

12 discriminatory lending practices under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, 15 U.S.C.

13 §1691, et seq. ("ECOA"), and the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §3601 et seq.

14 ("FHA"), on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated.

15

4. This class action challenges Chase's racially discriminatory mortgage

16 lending practices. Chase has engaged in disparate impact discrimination through its

17 development and implementation of mortgage pricing policies and procedures that

18 provide financial incentives to its authorized loan officers, mortgage brokers and

19 correspondent lenders to make subjective decisions to increase interest rates and

20 charge additional fees and costs to minority borrowers.

21

5. Chase's authorized loan officers, mortgage brokers and correspondent

22 lenders are given discretion - and actually encouraged and incentivized - to increase

23 interest rates and charge additional fees to certain borrowers. These policies directly

24 lead to minorities receiving home loans with higher interest rates and higher fees and

25 costs than similarly situated non-minority borrowers.

26

6. As used in this Complaint, "minority" or "minorities" shall refer to all

27 non-Caucasians and other minority racial groups protected under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981,

28 1982, and 3604, and 15 U.S.C. §1691.

- 1-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 3 of 23 Page ID #:706

1

7. Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of all minority borrowers

2 (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Class" or "members of the Class") who

3 entered into residential mortgage loan contracts that were financed or purchased by
"
4 Chase, and who were harmed by defendants' discriminatory conduct.

5

8. Plaintiffs seek injunctive, declaratory, and equitable relief, punitive

6 damages, and other monetary and non-monetary remedies for Chase's racially

7 discriminatory conduct.

8

PARTIES

9

9. (a) Plaintiff Alfredo B. Payares is a Latino homeowner who resides at

10 13640 Merkel Ave., Paramount, California.

11

(b) Plaintiff Zinna Gonzalez is a minority homeowner who resides at

12 14769 B. Hersneeb Lane, Corona, California.

13

(c) Plaintiff Gregory Walker is a minority homeowner who resides at

14 16772 Odell Avenue, Victorville, California.

15

10. Defendants JPMorganChaseBank,N.A. andChaseBankUSA,N.A. are

16 national banking associations and wholly-owned subsidiaries of JPMorgan Chase &

17 Co., a Delaware corporation whose principal office is located in New York, New

18 York. Each of the plaintiffs' loans originated from andlor was serviced by Chase.

19

FACTS

20 I. Historical Discrimination in American Mortgage Lending

21

11. Racial discrimination in America's mortgage lending industry has a long

22 legacy. As this Complaint attests, that unfortunate history continues to this day due to

23 discriminatory treatment of minority borrowers by mortgage banks such as Chase.

24

12. The Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard University conducted a

25 study in 2005 called "The Dual Mortgage Market: The Persistence of Discrimination

26 in Mortgage Lending," which summarizes that history well. It states that "in the

27 immediate post-World War II period, racial discrimination in mortgage lending was

28 easy to spot. From government-sponsored racial covenants in the Federal Housing

- 2-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 4 of 23 Page ID #:707

1 Administration (FHA) guidelines to the redlining practices of private mortgage

2 lenders and financial institutions, minorities were denied access to home mortgages in

3 ways that severely limited their ability to purchase a home. Today, mortgage lending

4 discrimination is more subtle. . .. [M]ore than three decades after the enactment of

5 national fair lending legislation, minority consumers continue to have less-than-equal

6 access to loans at the best prices and on the best terms that their credit history, income,

7 and other individual financial considerations merit." Id. at 1.

8

13. The federal Home Mortgage Disclosure Act ("HMDA") requires

9 mortgage lenders to report information about the home loans they process each year.

10 In 2005, lenders reported information on more than 30 million home loan applications

11 pursuant to HMDA. In 1989, Congress required lenders to begin disclosing

12 information about mortgage borrowers' race and ethnicity. In 2004, concerned with

13 potential racial discrimination in loan pricing, and recognizing that racial or other

14 types of discrimination can occur when loan officers and mortgage brokers have

15 latitude in setting interest rates, the Federal Reserve Board began requiring lenders to

16 also report information concerning rates, points, and fees, charged to borrowers on

17 high-cost loans.

18

14. HMDA data for 2004 reveals profound loan pricing disparities between

19 Hispanic borrowers and non-Hispanic whites even after controlling for borrowers'

20 gender, income, property location, and loan amount. After accounting for those

21 differences in the 2004 HMDA data, Hispanic borrowers were still almost twice as

22 likely to receive a higher-rate home loan as non-Hispanic whites

23 (http://www.responsiblelending.org/pdfslTestimony-Ernst061306.pdf (last viewed

24 Dec. 29, 2008». In a speech last year, the Vice-Chairman of the Federal Deposit

25 Insurance Corporation, Martin Gruenberg, discussed the 2004 HMDA data and

26 observed that that data "clearly indicated" that Hispanics are more likely to receive

27 high-cost home loans than are non-Hispanic whites (http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/

28 speeches/archives/2006/chairman/spoctI806.html (last viewed Dec. 29, 2008».

-3-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 5 of 23 Page ID #:708

1

15. Likewise, HMDA data for 2005 shows that "for conventional home-

2 purchase loans, the gross mean incidence of higher-priced lending was 54.7 percent

3 for blacks and 17.2 percent for non-Hispanic whites, a difference of 37.5 percentage

4 points." [d. at A 159. The situation is similar for refinancing, where there is a

5 difference of 28.3 percentage points between blacks and non-Hispanic whites. Avery,

6 Brevoort, and Canner, Federal Reserve Bulletin, "Higher-Priced Home Lending and

7 the 2005 HMDA Date," A124, A159 (Sept. 8, 2006).

8

16. The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now

9 (ACORN) released a report entitled "The High Cost of Credit: Disparities in High-

10 priced Refinanced Loans to Minority Homeowners in 125 American Cities," dated

11 September 27,2005, which found that "[i]n every metropolitan area where at least 50

12 refinances were made to African-American homeowners, African-Americans were

13 more likely to receive a high-cost loan than White homeowners." [d. at 12.

14

17. Chase's lending practices are of a piece with the foregoing history.

15 II. Past as Prologue: CHASE's Discriminatory Lending Policies

16

A. CHASE's Relationships with Its Mortgage Brokers and

Correspondent Lenders

17

18. Chase represents itself as the fourth largest residential mortgage lender.

18

It originates and funds mortgage loans through loan officers, brokers and through a

19

network of correspondent lenders. On information and belief, the loan officers,

20

mortgage brokers and correspondent lenders that work with Chase broker and fund

21

loans in collaboration with Chase, and in conformance with Chase's credit-pricing

22

policies and procedures.

23

19. Chase has followed - and continues to follow - discretionary loan pricing

-4-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 6 of 23 Page ID #:709

1 mortgage loans with less favorable conditions than were given to similarly situated

2 non-minority borrowers. This pattern of discrimination is not the result of random or

3 non-discriminatory factors. Rather, it is a direct result of Chase's mortgage lending

4 policies and procedures.

5

20. On information and belief, Chase's authorized loan officers, mortgage

6 brokers and correspondent lenders receive part or all of their compensation from

7 Chase based on the interest rate charged to the borrower. Chase's in-house loan

8 officers, authorized brokers and correspondent lenders receive more compensation

9 from Chase when they steer their clients into Chase loans with higher interest rates,

10 and less compensation when they place their clients into Chase loans with lower

11 interest rates.

12

21. Chase actively implements this discriminatory credit-pricing policy in a

13 number of ways, including actively educating its loan officers and brokers about

14 Chase's credit policies and procedures, and directing its loan officers and brokers

15 regarding the marketing of Chase loan products.

16

22. These credit-pricing policies and procedures permit Chase's authorized

17 loan officers, mortgage brokers and correspondent lenders subjectively to charge

18 certain loan applicants yield spread premiums and other discretionary charges,

19 including minority loan applicants.

20

23. This pattern of discrimination cannot be justified by business necessity,

21 and could be avoided through the use of alternative policies and procedures that have

22 less discriminatory impact and no less business efficacy.

23

B. CHASE's Discretionary Credit Pricing System: Designed to

Discriminate

24

24. Chase discriminates through its authorized mortgage brokers. Authorized

-5 -

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 7 of 23 Page ID #:710

1 Chase; tell loan applicants about Chase's various financing options; and ultimately

2 originate mortgage loans funded by Chase using Chase's forms and in accordance

3 with Chase's policies and procedures.

4

25. Likewise with Chase's authorized correspondent lenders and loan

5 officers, who also act as Chase's agents in originating loans. Correspondent mortgage

6 lenders and loan officers that work with Chase make loans in accordance with Chase's

7 credit policies and procedures. Chase funds correspondent-generated loans before or

8 shortly after they go to closing.

).

9

26. Chase, then, funds loans originated by its loan officers, authorized

10 mortgage brokers and correspondent lenders, sets the terms and conditions of credit on

11 those loans, and shoulders part or all of the risk on such loans. Chase actively

12 enforces its credit policies through its authorized loan officers, mortgage brokers and

13 correspondent lenders in a variety of ways. Among other things, Chase supplies its

14 loan officers, correspondent lenders and mortgage brokers with an array of loan-

15 related forms and agreements, including loan contracts, loan applications, and

16 instructions on completing loan applications and contracts. And, as noted above,

17 Chase actively trains its authorized brokers to follow Chase's policies and procedures,

18 and reinforces that training with marketing support.

19

27. Once a loan applicant has provided credit information to Chase through a

20 loan officer, mortgage broker or correspondent lender, Chase performs an initial

21 objective credit analysis. At that point, Chase evaluates numerous risk-related credit

22 variables, including debt-to-income ratios, loan-to-value ratios, credit bureau histories,

23 debt ratios, bankruptcies, automobile repossessions, prior foreclosures, payment

24 histories, credit scores, and the like.

25

28. Chase derives a risk-based financing rate from these objective factors,

26 which Chase and others in the mortgage industry simply call the "par rate" (Chase's

27 brokers and correspondent lenders can also estimate the par rates by referring to an

28 applicant's credit bureau determined credit score).

-6 -

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 8 of 23 Page ID #:711

1

29. Although Chase's initial analysis applies objective criteria to calculate

2 this risk-related interest rate, Chase as a matter of policy and procedure authorizes its

3 loan officers, brokers and correspondent lenders to mark up that rate later, and also

4 impose additional non-risk-based charges including yield spread premiums, and other

5 discretionary fees. Chase regularly communicates applicable par rates, authorized

6 yield spread premiums, and other discretionary fees to its loan officers, brokers and

7 correspondent lenders via "rate sheets" and other communications.

8

30. Chase gives its loan officers, authorized mortgage brokers and

9 correspondent lenders discretion to impose yield spread premiums and other

10 subjective fees on borrowers. When borrowers pay yield spread premiums, Chase

11 shares in additional income generated by the premium because the yield spread

12 premium-affected borrower is locked into a higher interest rate going forward on their

13 Chase loan than they would be if they had been placed in a par rate loan without a

14 yield spread premium.

15

31. Chase's borrowers pay yield spread premiums and other discretionary

16 fees that inflate their finance charges not knowing that a portion of their finance

17 charges are non-risk-related.

18

32. Chase's policies and procedures concerning the assessment of yield

19 spread premiums and other discretionary fees cause persons with identical or similar

20 credit scores to pay differing amounts for obtaining credit. Such subjective loan

21 pricing - which by design imposes differing finance charges on persons with the same

22 or similar credit profiles - disparately impacts Chase's minority borrowers.

23

33. While Chase's use of a common credit policy for all loan applicants

24 might appear to be racially neutral, Chase's use of yield spread premiums and other

25 discretionary fees disproportionately and adversely affects minorities (relative to

26 similarly situated non-minorities). Chase's credit policy causes minorities to pay

27 disparately more discretionary finance charges than similarly situated non-minorities.

28

-7-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 9 of 23 Page ID #:712

1 As the HMDA data cited herein indicates, minorities are substantially more likely than

2 similarly situated non-minorities to pay such charges.

3

34. As described above, Chase's credit pricing policy by design discriminates

4 against minority borrowers and directly causes this disparate impact.

5 III. Chase Imposed Discriminatory Fees on Plaintiffs

6

Alfredo Payares

7

35. Chase's discriminatory credit pricing policy directly damaged plaintiff

8 Payares. On or about August 22, 2005, Mr. Payares refinanced his single-family

9 home located at 13640 Merkel Ave., Paramount, California. The refinancing was

10 arranged through Amstar Mortgage Corporation, a national mortgage banking and

11 brokerage company which also acts as a correspondent lender, through its offices in

12 Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Like other mortgage brokers who do business with Chase,

13 Amstar's loan officers are compensated on a commission basis.

14

36. Amstar arranged for Mr. Payares to obtain a 30-year, adjustable rate loan

15 in the principal amount of $282,000 secured by a first Deed of Trust and bearing

16 interest at the rate of 6.9500% per annum (an APR of 9.741 %). The loan was

17 financed by Chase Bank U.S.A. through its San Diego office, and was to be serviced

18 by Chase Home Finance (also in San Diego). On or about October 1, 2005, the loan

19 servicing function was transferred to IP Morgan Chase.

20

37. The HUD Settlement Statement and the Final Settlement Statement

21 issued by the escrow agent reflect that Mr. Payares paid $14,010.45 in settlement

22 charges in connection with the transaction. For its services, Amstar charged (among

23 other things) an $8,460 "loan origination fee," a $1,900 "application fee," a $760

24 "processing fee," and a $375 ''underwriting fee." Chase charged another $320

25 "underwriting fee," a $175 "processing fee," and a $275 "document processing fee."

26 In addition, Amstar imposed a $5,640 "Yield Spread Premium" which was "paid

27 outside of closing" (POC), bringing plaintiff s total fees to almost $20,000. On

28

-8-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 10 of 23 Page ID #:713

i
i
1
!. 1 information and belief, all of these fees were assessed pursuant to Chase's credit

2 pricing policies.

3

38. On information and belief, Amstar and Chase knew that Mr. Payares was

4 a minority borrower.

5

39. On information and belief, unbeknownst to Mr. Payares, the pricing of

6 his mortgage loan was actually a combination of an objective, risk-based calculation

7 and a totally subjective, discretionary component added pursuant to the defendants'

8 discretionary pricing policy.

9

40. On information and belief, Mr. Payares was subject to defendants'

10 discretionary pricing policy.

11

41. As a result of Chase's discriminatory conduct, Mr. Payares received a

12 loan on worse terms with higher costs than similarly situated nonminority borrowers.

13

Zinnia Gonzalez

14

42. Plaintiff Gonzalez has been harmed by defendants' unlawful conduct.

15

43. Ms. Gonzalez, a resident of Corona, California, is a Minority

16 homeowner. On August 16, 2007, Ms. Gonzalez obtained a mortgage loan from

17 JPMorgan Chase, secured by her residence located at 14769 Bittersweet Lane,

18 Corona, California. Her lender was listed as "Chase Bank USA, N.A." At closing,

19 Ms. Gonzalez was given a notice informing her that her loan would be serviced by

20 Chase Bank U.S.A., N.A. clo Chase Home Finance, LLC. She was also given a notice

21 that the servicing of her loan was being transferred to JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. clo

22 Chase Home Finance, LLC.

23

44. Ms. Gonzalez' loan was brokered by Watermark Capital, Inc.

24

45. At the time of her loan, Ms. Gonzalez had been gainfully employed by

25 Los Angeles County for approximately 15 years, was a successful business owner and

26 had a good credit score. Ms. Gonzalez was placed into an ARM, with an initial rate of

27 10.250%. At closing, she was charged numerous fees, including a $200 notary fee, a

28 $50 ..email fee" and other excessive fees.

- 9-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 11 of 23 Page ID #:714

1

46. Ms. Gonzalez' loan also features a balloon payment at the end of the

2 term.

3

47. Also included in the settlement charges was a loan origination fee,

4 bearing the characteristics of a yield spread premium, paid to Watermark Capital.

5

48. Ms. Gonzalez is now trapped in a high cost loan. Despite clear language

6 in her Adjustable Rate Note that provided for an unfettered right to prepay the loan in

7 full or in part, without penalty, Ms. Gonzalez was instructed to sign an addendum that

8 burdened her with a prepayment penalty, which restricts her ability to refinance into a

9 less expensive loan.

10

49. Ms. Gonzalez was unable to maintain her mortgage payments for her

11 high-priced loan and is now facing the threat of foreclosure.

12

50. On information and belief, Watermark Capital Inc. and Chase knew that

13 Ms. Gonzalez was a minority borrower.

14

51. On information and belief, unbeknownst to Ms. Gonzalez, the pricing of

15 her mortgage loan was actually a combination of an objective, risk-based calculation

16 and a totally subjective, discretionary component added pursuant to the defendants'

17 discretionary pricing policy.

18

52. On information and belief, Ms. Gonzalez was subject to the defendants'

19 discretionary pricing policy.

20

53. On information and belief, Ms. Gonzalez was charged a

21 disproportionately greater amount in non-risk-related credit charges than similarly

22 situated white persons.

23

54. Ms. Gonzalez was not offered less expensive loan products that were

24 available to similarly-situated non-minority borrowers with her credit characteristics

25 directly under the defendants' policies.

26

Gregory Walker

27

55. Plaintiff Walker has been harmed by defendants' unlawful conduct.

28

- 10-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 12 of 23 Page ID #:715
,,.

1

56. Mr. Walker, a resident of Victorville, California, is a Minority

2 homeowner. On August 14, 2007, Mr. Walker obtained a mortgage loan from

3 JPMorgan Chase, secured by his residence located at 16772 Odell Avenue,

4 Victorville, California. His lender was listed as "JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A." Mr.

5 Walker's loan was brokered by Premier Group Lending.

6

57. At the time of his loan, Mr. Walker had been gainfully employed by

7 Florida Hospital for a number of years, had excellent income and an excellent credit

8 score. Mr. Walker was placed into an ARM, with an initial rate of 8.0%.

9

58. Also included in the settlement charges was a yield spread premium, paid

10 outside of closing by JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. to his mortgage broker, Premier

11 Group Lending.

12

59. At closing, Mr. Walker inquired as to the high nature of his interest rate

13 and was told that this was the best that Chase could offer to him. He is now trapped in

14 a high cost loan. Further, Mr. Walker has been unable to remain current with his

15 mortgage loan payments and currently owes Chase more than his home is worth.

16

60. On information and belief, Premier Lending and Chase knew that Mr.

17 Walker was a minority borrower.

18

61. On information and belief, unbeknownst to Mr. Walker, the pricing ofhis

19 mortgage loan was actually a combination of an objective, risk-based calculation and

20 a totally subjective, discretionary component added pursuant to the defendants'

21 discretionary pricing policy.

22

62. On information and belief, Mr. Walker was subject to the defendants'

23 discretionary pricing policy.

24

63. On information and belief, Mr. Walker was charged a disproportionately

25 greater amount in non-risk-related credit charges than similarly situated white persons.

26

64. Mr. Walker was not offered less expensive loan products that were

27 available to similarly-situated non-minority borrowers with his credit characteristics

28 directly under the defendants' policies.

- 11 -

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 13 of 23 Page ID #:716

1

CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

1

2

65. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege each allegation above as if set forth herein

i'

3 in full.

4

66. This class action is brought pursuant to ECOA and the FHA by plaintiffs

5 on behalf of themselves and all minority borrowers who entered into residential

6 mortgage loan contracts that were financed or purchased by Chase, and who were

7 harmed by defendants' discriminatory conduct.

8

67. Plaintiffs sue on their own behalf, and on behalf of a class of persons

9 under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and (b)(2) and/or (b)(3).

10

68. Plaintiffs do not know the exact size of the Class or identities of the

11 members of the Class, since that information is in the exclusive control of Chase.

12 Plaintiffs believe that the Class includes many thousands, or tens of thousands of

13 individuals, who are geographically dispersed throughout the United States.

14 Therefore, the Class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.

15

69. All members of the Class have been subjected to and affected by Chase's

16 practice of assessing yield spread premiums and other discretionary fees on mortgage

17 loans. There are questions of law and fact that are common to the Class, and that

18 predominate over any questions affecting only individual members of the Class.

19 These questions include, but are not limited to the following:

20

(a) The nature and scope of Chase's policies and procedures

21 concerning the assessment of yield spread premiums and other discretionary fees on

22 mortgage loans it funds;

23

(b) whether Chase discriminated against Class members by charging

24 them higher interest, fees, and costs, than Chase charges similarly situated non-

25 minority borrowers;

26

(c) whether Chase can articulate any legitimate nondiscriminatory

27 reason for its policies and procedures;

28

- 12-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 14 of 23 Page ID #:717

1

(d) whether Chase and its subsidiaries are creditors under the ECOA

2 because, in the ordinary course of business, they participate in the decision of whether

3 or not to extend credit to consumers;

4

(e) whether Chase's policies and procedures regarding yield spread

5 premiums and other discretionary fees have a disparate impact on minority borrowers;

6

(f) whether Chase has any business justification for its policies and

7 procedures.

8

(g) whether there is a less discriminatory alternative to these policies

9 and procedures;

10

(h) whether Chase devised and deployed a scheme or common course

11 of conduct that acted to deceive plaintiffs and members of the Class;

12

(i) whether the Court can enter declaratory and injunctive relief; and

13

(j) the proper measure of disgorgement or monetary relief.

14

70. Plaintiffs' claims are typical of the claims of the Class, and do not

15 conflict with the interests of any other members of the Class in that both plaintiffs, and

16 the other members of the Class, were subjected to the same yield spread premiums

17 and other discretionary fees that have disproportionately affected minority borrowers.

18

71. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately represent the interests of the Class.

19 Plaintiff is committed to vigorous prosecution of the Class's claims, and they have

20 retained attorneys who have extensive experience in consumer protection and credit

21 discrimination actions and in class actions.

22

72. Chase has acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the

23 Class, thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory

24 relief with respect to the class as a whole.

25

73. A class action is superior to other methods for the speedy and efficient

26 adjudication of this controversy. A class action regarding the issues in this case does

27 not create any problems of manageability.

28

- 13-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 15 of 23 Page ID #:718

1

ACCRUAL,: FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT,: CONTINUING

VIOLATION, AND EQUITABLE TOLLING

2

74. Plaintiffs and Class members did not know, and could not reasonably

3

have known, that they would receive from Chase mortgage loans with worse terms

4

and higher costs and fees than non-minorities. Their claims did not accrue until

5

shortly before the filing of this action.

6

75. Chase's discriminatory conduct was inherently self-concealing. Chase

7

knew that plaintiffs and Class members could not determine the relationship between

8

the terms, fees, and costs of their loans to those available to non-minorities, or to the

9

services that Chase and its contracted mortgage brokers provided. Chase has superior

10

knowledge about the terms, fees, and costs of its loans, and knew that the terms, fees

11

and costs provided to minorities, unbeknownst to them, were substantially worse than

12

the loans provided to non-minorities.

13

76. Chase has not released or provided information about its discrimination

14

against plaintiffs and Class members, and has actively and fraudulently concealed its

15

discriminatory practices.

16

77. As a result of the foregoing, plaintiffs and Class members in the exercise

17

of due diligence could not have reasonably discovered the discriminatory practices,

18

and did not do so until just recently. For the reasons alleged above, the members of

19

the Class still do not know that they have been and continue to be injured by Chase's

20

discriminatory conduct.

21

78. Chase's discriminatory conduct is continuing in nature, and Chase has

22

committed discriminatory acts throughout the limitations period. Other Class

23

members have contracted with Chase, and been subject to the identical discriminatory

24

practices, within the applicable period of limitations.

25

79. There is a substantial nexus between the acts of discrimination occurring

26

within the limitation periods prior to filing suit, and the acts of discrimination before

27

28

- 14-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 16 of 23 Page ID #:719

1 that time. The acts involve the same type of discrimination and are recurring, not

2 isolated events.

3

80. Chase specifically misled plaintiffs and Class members into believing

4 that the mortgage-related terms, fees, and costs they were offered were fair,

5 reasonable, and the same as offered to non-minorities, and took steps to conceal its

6 fraudulent and unfair conduct.

7

81. The statute of limitations applicable to any claims that plaintiffs or other

8 Class members have brought or could bring as a result of the unlawful and fraudulent

9 concealment and course of conduct described herein, have been tolled as a result of

10 Chase's fraudulent concealment. In addition, plaintiffs and the Class did not and

11 could not have discovered their causes of action until the time alleged below, thereby

12 tolling any applicable statute of limitations.

13

COUNT I

Violation of the Egual Credit Opportunity Act (15 U.S.C. §1691 et seq.)

Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations above as if fully set forth

Chase engages in credit transactions through its offering, granting, and
purchasing of residential mortgage loans. 19
84. By imposing higher interest rates and other discretionary fees on
20
residential mortgage loans to plaintiffs and Class members than it imposed on non21
minority mortgage borrowers, Chase has discriminated against plaintiffs and members 22
of the Class with respect to a credit transaction on the basis of race in violation of the 23
ECOA. 15 U.S.c. §1691(a). 24
85. In addition, Chase's pricing policies and procedures (including yield
25
spread premiums), which provide financial incentives to its mortgage brokers and
26
correspondent lenders to make subjective decisions to increase interest rates and 27
28
- 15 -

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 17 of 23 Page ID #:720

1 charge additional fees and costs, have a disparate impact on plaintiffs and Class

2 members.

3

86. As a proximate result of Chase's violation of 15 U.S.C. §1691, plaintiffs

4 and members of the Class have been injured and are entitled to injunctive and

5 declaratory relief and damages, or make whole equitable relief.

6

87. In addition, Chase's conduct as alleged herein was intentional, willful,

7 wanton, reckless, malicious, outrageous, or otherwise aggravated beyond mere

8 negligence. Chase acted with malice and reckless indifference to the federally

9 protected rights of plaintiffs and members of the Class. As a result, plaintiffs and

10 members of the Class are entitled to punitive damages.

11

88. Moreover, Chase continues to discriminate in violation of the ECOA

12 against Class members every time Chase provides a home mortgage loan as described

13 herein. If not enjoined from such violation by the Court, Chase will continue to

14 engage in conduct that disregards the rights of plaintiffs and members of the Class,

15 and cause plaintiffs and members of the Class irreparable injury for which there is no

16 adequate remedy at law. 15 U.S.c. §1691(e).

17

89. Plaintiffs and members of the Class ask this Court to declare the rights of

18 the parties herein regarding Chase's obligation to participate in credit transactions

19 without discriminating against applicants for credit on the basis of the applicants'

COUNT II
Violation of the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. §3601 et seq.)
Plaintiffs repeat, re-allege and incorporate the allegations above as if
fully set forth herein. 25
91. Mortgage lending and the providing of residential mortgage loans is a 26
"residential real estate-related transaction" within the meaning of the FHA. 42 U.S.C.
27 §3605(b).
28
- 16-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 18 of 23 Page ID #:721

1

92. By imposing higher interest rates and other discretionary fees on

2 residential mortgage loans to plaintiffs and Class members than it imposed on non-

3 minority mortgage borrowers, Chase has discriminated against plaintiffs and members

4 of the Class concerning their ability to participate in real estate-related transactions,

5 and in the terms and conditions of such transactions, in violation of the FHA. 42

6 U.S.C. §3605(a).

7

93. In addition, Chase's pricing policies and procedures (including yield

8 spread premiums), which provide financial incentives to its mortgage brokers and

9 correspondent lenders to make subjective decisions to increase interest rates and

10 charge additional fees and costs, had a disparate impact upon plaintiffs and Class

11 members.

12

94. As a proximate result of Chase's violation of 42 U.S.C. §3605, plaintiffs

13 and members of the Class have been injured and are entitled to injunctive and

14 declaratory relief and damages, or make whole equitable relief.

15

95. In addition, Chase's conduct as alleged herein was intentional, willful,

16 wanton, reckless, malicious, outrageous, or otherwise aggravated beyond mere

17 negligence. Chase acted with malice and reckless indifference to the federally

18 protected rights of plaintiff and members of the Class. As a result, plaintiffs and

19 members of the Class are entitled to punitive damages.

20

96. Moreover, Chase continues to discriminate in violation of the FHA

21 against members of the Class every time Chase provides a home mortgage loan as

22 described herein. If not enjoined from such violation by the Court, Chase will

23 continue to engage in conduct that disregards the rights of plaintiffs and members of

24 the Class, and cause plaintiffs and members of the Class irreparable injury for which

25 there is no adequate remedy at law. 42 U.S.C. §3613(c).

26

97. Plaintiffs and members of the Class ask this Court to declare the rights of

27 the parties herein regarding Chase's obligation to participate in credit transactions

28

- 17 -

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 19 of 23 Page ID #:722

1 without discriminating against applicants for credit on the basis of the applicants'

2 race. 3

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

4

WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, plaintiffs request the following

5 relief:

6

A. An order determining that the action is a proper class action pursuant to

7 Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;

8

B. A judgment awarding plaintiffs and Class members costs and

9 disbursements incurred in connection with this action, including reasonable attorneys'

10 fees, expert witness fees and other costs;

11

C. A judgment granting extraordinary equitable and/or injunctive relief as

12 permitted by law or equity, including rescission, restitution, reformation, attaching,

13 impounding, or imposing a constructive trust upon, or otherwise restricting, the

14 proceeds of defendants' ill-gotten funds to ensure that plaintiffs and Class members

15 have an effective remedy;

16

D. A judgment awarding plaintiffs and Class members compensatory

17 damages according to proof;

18

E. A judgment awarding punitive damages to plaintiffs and Class members;

19

F. A judgment granting declaratory and injunctive relief and all relief that

20 flows from such injunctive and declaratory relief; and

21

G. A judgment or other order granting such other and further relief as the

22 Court deems just and proper including, but not limited to, recessionary relief and

23 reformation.

24

25

26

27

28

- 18 -

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 20 of 23 Page ID #:723

1

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

2

Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

cl, 3 DATED: January 2009

COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER

RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP

4

JOHN J. STOIA, JR.

THEODORE 1. PINTAR

5

LESLIE E. HURST

COTY R. MILLER

6

7

8

THEODORE 1. PINTAR

9

655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101

10

Telephone: 619/231-1058 619/231-7423 (fax)

11 RODDY KLEIN & RYAN

12

GARY KLEIN

727 Atlantic Avenue

13

Boston, MA 02111-2810 Telephone: 617/357-5500

14

617/357-5030 (fax)

15

BONNETT, FAIRBOURN, FRIEDMAN & BALINT, P.e.

16

ANDREW S."FRIEDMAN WENDY J. HARRISON

17

2901 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1000 Phoenix, AZ 85012

18

Telephone: 602/274-1100 6021274-1199 (fax)

19

CHAVEZ & GERTLER, L.L.P.

20

MARK A. CHAVEZ

JONATHAN GERTLER

21

NANCE F. BECKER 42 Miller Avenue

22

Mill Valley, CA 94941 Telephone: 415/381-5599

23

415f381-5572 (fax)

24

25

26

27

28

- 19-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 21 of 23 Page ID #:724

1
2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
S:\CasesSD\Chase FHA\AMD CMP 00056434.doc
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22
23 24 25 26 27 28

BARROWAY TOPAZ KESSLER MELTZER & CHECK, LLP
JOSEPH H. MELTZER EDWARD W. CIOLKO JOSEPH A. WEEDEN PETER MUHIC DONNA SIEGEL MOFFA 280 King of Prussia Road Radnor, Pennsylvania 19087 Telephone: 610/667-7706 KINOY, TAREN & GERAGHTY P.C. JEFFREY L. TAREN 224 S. MichiRan Ave., Suite 300 Chicago, IL 60604 Telepfione: 312/663-5210 312/663-6663 (fax) Attorneys for Plaintiffs
- 20-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 22 of 23 Page ID #:725

1

DECLARATION OF SERVICE BY MAIL

2

I, the undersigned, declare:

3

1. That declarant is and was, at all times herein mentioned, a citizen ofthe

4 United States and a resident ofthe County of San Diego, over the age of 18 years, and

5 not a party to or interested party in the within action; that declarant's business address

6 is 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, California 92101.

7

2. That on January 14, 2009, declarant served the FIRST AMENDED

8 CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT by depositing a true copy thereof in a United States

9 mailbox at San Diego, California in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully

10 prepaid and addressed to the parties listed on the attached Service List.

11

3. That there is a regular communication by mail between the place of

12 mailing and the places so addressed.

13

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

:: Executed this 14thdaYOfJanUary'2~g~

16

JUNE:I

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 85 Filed 01/16/09 Page 23 of 23 Page ID #:726

CH~SEFHA
Service List - 1/14/2009 Page 1 of 1

(07-0262)

Counsel For Defendant(s)
Michael J. Agoglia Wendy Garbers Morrison & Foerster LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94105-2406
415/268-7000 415/268-7522 (Fax)

Counsel For Plaintiff(s)
Andrew S. Friedman Wendy J. Harrison Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint, P.C. 2901 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1000 Phoenix, AZ 85012
602/274-11 00 602/274-1199 (Fax)

Mark A. Chavez Jonathan E. Gertler Nance F. Becker
Chavez & Gertler, L.L.P. 42 Miller Avenue Mill Valley, CA 94941
415/381-5599 415/381-5572 (Fax)

John J. Stoia, Jr. Theodore J. Pintar Leslie E. Hurst Coughlin Stoia GeUer Rudman & Robbins LLP 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101
619/231-1058 619/231-7423(Fax)

Gary Klein Roddy Klein & Ryan 727 Atlantic Avenue Boston, MA 02111-2810
617/357-5500 617/357-5030 (Fax)

 
 Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN
1

11 J Document 111 Filed 05/17/10 Page 1 - - - - of 6 Page ID #:1046 FILED - SOUT~-l-T-i- '- j-D-I- V, iS-IO-- N~-CLERK, Us. PISTI1ICT soum

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR1

NAY 20iu

2

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNI ACE.NT!=RA~L-:::-D=IST=RI=CT;:-;:Q·::-;=-"ff'.)cALlFORN A

3

SOUTHERN DIVISION

BY

~ DEPU y

4

5 ALFREDO B. PAYARES".. ZINNIA

Case No. CV 07-05540 AG (ANx)

GONZALEZ, and GREGuRY

6 WALKER,

7p~ i~EL~Ii~\4~NDA1R0YRADPEPRROOVFAL OF

7

Plaintiffs,

SETTLEMENT

8

v.

9 CHASE BANK USA N.A. and
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,
10 Defendants.
11

Ctrm: 10D Judge: Hon. Andrew J. Guilford

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
[pROPOSED] ORDER OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETILEMENT

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 111 Filed 05/17/10 Page 2 of 6 Page ID #:1047

1

[PROPOSED] ORDER OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

2

3

Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the Class Members, and the

4 Defendants Chase Bank USA, N.A. and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (collectively,

5 "Chase") in this case (together, the "Parties"), entered into a Settlement Agreement,

6 providing for a proposed settlement (the "Settlement") of this Action. A copy of

7 the Settlement Agreement and its exhibits was previously submitted to the Court in

8 connection with Plaintiffs' Motion for Preliminary Approval.

9

Plaintiffs have moved for, and Defendants have indicated that they do not

10 oppose, entry of this Order, which, inter alia, (i) provides for notice to affected

11 persons, (ii) establishes a procedure for filing of objections to the Settlement, and

12 (iii) schedules a hearing for final approval of the Settlement. After due

13 consideration,

14

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

15

1. This Order incorporates by reference the definitions in the Settlement

16 Agreement, and all capitalized terms used in this Order will have the same

17 meanings as set forth in the Settlement Agreement, unless otherwise defined in this

18 Order.

19

2. Based on the Court's review of the Settlement Agreement, the

20 supporting briefs and declarations, argument of counsel, and the entire record,

21 including Defendants' statement of non-opposition, the Court finds that the

22 proposed Settlement is within the range of possible approval. The Plaintiffs'

23 Motion for Preliminary Approval of the Settlement Agreement is granted.

24

3. If, for any reason, the Settlement is not finally approved or does not

25 become effective, this provisional approval and class certification Order shall be

26 null and void, and shall not be used or referred to for any purpose in this Action or

27 any other action or proceeding.

28

[pROPOSED] ORDER OF PRELIMINARY

1

APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT

, ' ' C,ase 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 111 Filed 05/17/10 Page 3 of 6 Page ID #:1048

1

4. Solely for the purpose of settlement in accordance with the Settlement

2 Agreement, and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of

3 Civil Procedure, this Court hereby provisionally approves the following settlement

4 class ("Settlement Class"):

5

All African-American and Hispanic borrowers who, since

6

August 23,2005, obtained a mortgage loan originated

7

through Chase's wholesale channel.

8

5. For settlement purposes only, and after considering the relevant factors

9 in Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, the Court conditionally designates Class Representatives

10 Alfredo B. Payares, Zinnia Gonzalez, and Gregory Walker as representatives of the

11 Settlement Class, and Class Counsel are conditionally appointed as counsel for the

12 Settlement Class. The law fIrms and attorneys conditionally representing the

13 Settlement Class are:

14

Theodore J. Pintar

COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP

15

655 West Broadway, Suite 1900

San Diego, CA 92101 16

G'!I}' E. Klein

17

RODDY KLEIN & RYAN

727 Atlantic Ave. 2d Floor

18

Boston, MA 02111

19

Andrew S. Friedman

BONNET FAIRBOURN FRIEDMAN & BALINT P.C.

20

2901 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1000

Phoenix, AZ 85012 21

Mark A. Chavez

22

CRAVEZ & GERTLER LLP

42 Miller Avenue

23

Mill Valley, CA 94941

24

Donna Si~gel Moffa

25

BARROWAY TOPAZ KESSLER MELTZER & CHECK, LLP 280 King of Prussia Road

Radnor, PA 19087 26

Jeffr~y L. Taren

27

KINOY TAREN & GERAGHTY P.C.

224 S. Michigan Avenue, Suite 300

28

Chicago, IL 60604

[pROPOSED] ORDER OF PRELIMINARY

2

APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT

· . C,ase 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 111 Filed 05/17/10 Page 4 of 6 Page ID #:1049

1

6. Chase is hereby authorized to retain Tilghman & Co., P.C., 3415

2 Independence Drive, Suite 102, Birmingham, Alabama 35209, as Settlement

3 Administrator to administer the notice procedures and other aspects of this

4 proposed Settlement, as more fully set forth in the Settlement Agreement.

5

7. A hearing (the Fairness Hearing) shall be held before this Court on

6 September 13,2010, at 10:00 a.m., to hear objections and determine: (i) whether

7 the proposed Settlement and compromise of this Action as set forth in the

8 Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate for the Class Members and

9 should be approved by the Court; (ii) whether the Final Judgment should be entered

10 approving the Settlement; (iii) whether to approve the request of Class Counsel for

11 payment of attorneys' fees and reimbursement of expenses; and (iv) whether to

12 approve the request of Class Representatives for service payments. Notice of such

13 hearing shall be provided to Class Members in the fashion described in section 3.3

14 of the Settlement Agreement. Such notice shall be substantially in the form of

15 Exhibits B, C, and D hereto, as appropriate, and shall be mailed on or before June

16 16,2010.

17

8. Any interested person may appear at the Fairness Hearing to show

18 cause why the proposed Settlement should or should not be approved as fair,

19 reasonable, adequate, and in good faith and/or why the request of Class Counsel for

20 approval of attorneys' fees and reimbursement of litigation-related expenses should

21 or should not be approved as fair and reasonable and/or why the request of Class

22 Representatives for approval of service payments should or should not be approved

23 as fair and reasonable; provided, however, that no person shall be heard or entitled

24 to contest the approval of the terms and conditions of the proposed Settlement, the

25 fees, costs, and reimbursements requested by Class Counsel, or the service

26 payments requested by Class Representatives, unless that person (i) has sent or

27 delivered written objections and copies of any supporting papers and briefs so that

28 they are received no later than July 30,2010, to counsel below:

[pROPOSED] ORDER OF PRELIMINARY

3

APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT

· ' C, ase 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 111 Filed 05/17/10 Page 5 of 6 Page ID #:1050

1

Theodore J. Pintar

2

Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP

655 West Broadway, Suite 1900

3

San Diego, CA 92101

Fax: (619) 231-7423

4

Counsel for Plaintiffs

5

-and-

6

Michael J. A~oglia

7

Morrison & Foerster LLP

425 Market Street

8

San Francisco, CA 94105-2482

Fax: (415) 268-7522

9

Counsel for Defendants Chase Bank USA, N.A. and

10

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N .A.

11 and (ii) has filed said objections, papers, and briefs, showing proof of service upon

12 said counsel, with the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Central

13 District of California, 411 W. Fourth Street, Santa Ana, California, on or before the

14 same date. Any Class Member who does not submit an objection in the manner

15 provided above shall be deemed to have waived any objection to the Settlement and

16 shall forever be foreclosed from making any objection to class certification, to the

17 fairness, adequacy, or reasonableness of the Settlement, to any attorneys' fees and

18 reimbursements approved, and to any service payments to the Class Representatives

19 approved.

20

9. Any Class Member who wishes to be excluded from the Settlement

21 Class and not be bound by the Settlement Agreement must mail a request for

22 exclusion ("Opt-Out") to the Settlement Administrator, postmarked no later than

23 July 30,2010. For a Class Member's Opt-Out to be valid, it must be timely (as

24 judged by the postmark deadline set forth above) and: (a) state the name of this

25 lawsuit, Payares v. Chase Bank US.A., N.A., Case No. 07-05540; (b) state the

26 Class Member's full name and address; (c) contain the Class Member's signature;

27 and (d) unequivocally state the Class Member's intent to be excluded from the

28 Settlement Class, to be excluded from the Settlement, not to participate in the

WROPOSED]ORDEROFPRELThflNARY APPROVAL OF SETILEMENT

4

.. · Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 111 Filed 05/17/10 Page 6 of 6 Page ID #:1051

1 Settlement, and/or to waive all right to the benefits of the Settlement. Any Class

2 Member who does not submit a timely Opt-Out, and otherwise comply with all

3 requirements for requesting exclusion from the Settlement Class as set forth above

4 and in the Class Notice, shall be bound by the Settlement Agreement, including the

5 Release, as embodied in sections 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 of the Settlement Agreement, and

6 any Final Judgment entered in the Action. Further, any Class Member who is a

7 successful Opt-Out will be deemed to have waived any rights or benefits under the

8 Settlement, and will not have standing to object to the Settlement or to seek to

9 intervene in the Action.

10

10. All memoranda, affidavits, declarations, and other evidence in support

11 of the request for approval of the Settlement, Class Counsel's request for approval

12 of attorneys' fees, costs, and reimbursement of expenses, and Class

13 Representatives' request for approval of service payments s~all be filed on or

14 before September 3, 2010.

15

11. The Court expressly reserves its right to adjourn the Fairness Hearing

16 from time to time without further notice other than to counsel of record and to

17 approve the proposed Settlement and request for approval of attorneys' fees and

18 expenses and request for approval of Class Representative service payments at or

19 after the originally scheduled Fairness Hearing.

20 21 22

IT IS SO ORDERED.
~tVu~ iL~ Date: May 17,2010_ _ _ _ _ _-----,1''-- / ,

~

23

UNITED UTES DISTRICT JUDGE

24

25

26

27

28 sf-2726543

[pROPOSED] ORDER OF PRELIMINARY

5

APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT

 
 Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 132 Filed 11/09/10 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:1862

1 ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWDLLP
2 JOHN J. STOIA, JR. (141757) THEODOREJ. PINTAR (131372)
3 San Diego, CA 92101-3301 Telephone: 619/231-1058
4 6191231-7423 (fax) johns@rgrdlaw.com
5 tedp@rgrdlaw.com

m - FII SOUTHERN DIVISION
CLERK, U,S DISTRICT COURT

'",jV - 9 2010

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ALiFORNIA

BY

'DEPUTY

6 RODDY KLEIN & RYAN GARY KLEIN
7 727 Atlantic Avenue Boston, MA 02111-2810
8 Telephone: 617/357-5500 617/357-5030 (fax)
9 klein@roddykleinryan.com

10 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

11

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14

SOUTHERN DIVISION

15 ALFREDO B. PAYARES, ZINNIA GONZALEZ and GREGORY
16 WALKER,

No. CV-07-05540-AG(ANx) CLASS ACTION

17

18

vs.

Plaintiffs,

lHlOI 6815P] FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

19 J.P. MORGAN CHASE & CO. et aI.,

20

Defendants.

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 - 23-

Case 2:07II -cv-05540-AG-AN Document 132 Filed 11/09/10 Page 2 of 7 Page ID #:1863

1

The Settlement Agreement between plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and

2 members of the Class defined below, and defendants Chase Bank USA, N.A. and

3 JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. ("Chase") provides for the Settlement of this lawsuit on

4 behalf of plaintiffs and Class Members, subject to final approval by this Court of its

5 terms and to the entry of this Final Judgment.

6

Pursuant to an Order, dated May 17, 2010 ("Preliminary Approval Order"), the

7 Court scheduled a hearing (the "Fairness Hearing") to consider final approval of the

8 Settlement Agreement and the Settlement reflected in it.

9

Chase denies any wrongdoing, fault, violation oflaw, or liability for damages of

10 any sort. Chase objected, and continues to object, to the certification of any class and

11 has agreed to the certification of this class for settlement purposes only.

12

A Fairness Hearing was held before this Court on September 13, 2010, to

13 consider, among other things, (i) whether the Settlement should be approved by this

14 Court as fair, reasonable, and adequate, (ii) whether Class Counsel's request for

15 approval of attorneys' fees and expenses is reasonable and should be approved by this

16 Court, and (iii) whether plaintiffs' request for approval of service payments is

17 reasonable and should be approved by this Court.

18

NOW THEREFORE, GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY

19 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT:

20

1. This Order incorporates by reference the definitions in the Settlement

21 Agreement, and all capitalized terms used in this Order will have the same meanings

22 as set forth in the Settlement Agreement, unless otherwise defined in this Order.

23

2. The Court finds that the Settlement Agreement is the product of good-

24 faith, arm's length negotiations by the Parties, with the assistance of an experienced

25 mediator. All Parties were represented by experienced counsel.

26

27

28

- 24-

Case 2:0II7-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 132 Filed 11/09/10 Page 3 of 7 Page ID #:1864

1

3. The Court finds that the Class proposed for purposes of the Settlement

2 meets the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and 23(b)(3), and hereby certifies a

3 Settlement Class in the Action as follows:

4

All African-American and Hispanic borrowers who, since August 23,

2005, obtained a mortgage loan originated through Chase's wliolesale

5

channel.

6

4. Notice was provided to members of the Settlement Class as provided for

7 under the Settlement Agreement and the Preliminary Approval Order. For the reasons

8 set forth in the Preliminary Approval Order, the Court finds that Notice was the best

9 notice practicable in the circumstances and that it met applicable standards pursuant to

10 Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2).

11

5. This Court approves the Settlement and all terms set forth in the

12 Settlement Agreement and finds that the Settlement is, in all respects, fair, reasonable,

13 adequate, and in the best interests of the Settlement Class, and the Parties to the

14 Agreement are directed to consummate and perform its terms.

15

6. The Parties dispute the validity of the claims in this Action, and their

16 dispute underscores not only the uncertainty of the outcome but also why the Court

17 finds the Settlement Agreement to be fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best

18 interests of the Settlement Class. Beyond facing uncertainty regarding the resolution

19 of those issues, by continuing to litigate, Class Members would also face the challenge

20 of surviving an appeal of any class certification order entered in this Action, and any

21 other rulings rendered during trial. The relief negotiated by the Parties includes the

22 ability of Class Members whose mortgage loans are paid off to claim either a cash

23 payment of $70 or a $300 credit toward the closing costs of a new Chase mortgage

24 loan. The relief negotiated by the Parties includes the ability of Class Members whose

25 mortgage loans are outstanding, but not Delinquent, to claim either a cash payment of

26 $90 or a $300 credit toward the closing costs of a new Chase mortgage loan. For

27 Class Members whose mortgage loans are outstanding, but are Delinquent, the relief

28 negotiated by the Parties includes special access ("Red Carpet Access") to Chase's

- 25-

Case 2:07II -cv-05540-AG-AN Document 132 Filed 11/09/10 Page 4 of 7 Page ID #:1865

1 existing loan modification program, with dedicated Chase personnel to assist with

2 loan modifications, with personnel with Spanish language skills. For these reasons,

3 the Court finds that the uncertainties of continued litigation in the trial court and

4 potentially on appeal, as well as the expense associated with it, weigh in favor of

5 approval of the Settlement Agreement.

6

7. Any and all objections to Final Approval of the Settlement Agreement

7 and to Class Counsel's request for approval of attorneys' fees and expenses have been

8 considered and are hereby found to be without merit and are overruled.

9

8. This entire Action is dismissed with prejudice, and without costs to any

10 Party, except as otherwise provided by the award of Attorney's Fees and Costs to

11 Class Counsel provided below.

12

9. Upon the Effective Date, the Class Representatives forever release,

13 waive, discharge, and agree to the dismissal of, with prejudice, all claims that have

14 been made, or could have been made, in the Action against Chase (defined here to

15 include all of its parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, successors, assignors,

16 assignees, and/or assigns and their respective subsidiaries, affiliates, agents,

17 successors, assignors, assignees, and/or assigns, and each of their respective present,

18 former, or future officers, directors, shareholders, agents, employees, representatives,

19 consultants, accountants, and attorneys), under ECOA or the FHA, or any other

20 federal or state statute or any common law theory, including all claims for monetary,

21 equitable, declaratory, injunctive, or any other form of relief.

22

10. Each Class Member who has not opted out of the Settlement in

23 accordance with the terms of the Agreement, and each of their respective spouses,

24 executors, representatives, heirs, successors, bankruptcy trustees, guardians, wards,

25 joint tenants, tenants in common, tenants by the entirety, co-borrowers, agents, and

26 assigns, and all those who claim through them or who assert claims on their behalf

27 (including the government in its capacity as parens patriae), will be deemed to have

28 completely released and forever discharged the Released Parties, and each of them,

- 26-

Case 2:07II -cv-05540-AG-AN Document 132 Filed 11/09/10 Page 5 of 7 Page ID #:1866

1 from any claim, right, demand, charge, complaint, action, cause of action, obligation,

2 or liability of any and every kind, including, without limitation, those based on

3 contract, ECOA, and/or the FHA, or any other federal, state, or local law, statute,

4 regulation, or common law, including all claims for monetary, equitable, declaratory,

5 injunctive, or any other form of relief, whether known or unknown, suspected or

6 unsuspected, under the law of any jurisdiction, which Class Representatives or any

7 Class Member ever had, now has, or may have in the future, resulting from, arising

8 out of, or in any way, directly or indirectly, connected with (a) the claims raised in this

9 Action or its related action, Gonzalez v. JPMorgan Chase, No. CV08-2140 (C.D.

lOCal.), and (b) claims which could have been raised in this Action or the Gonzalez

11 Action based on the same transactional nucleus of facts.

12

11. Class Counsel's request for approval of attorneys' fees and costs in the

13 amount of $1.95 million, which Chase does not oppose, is approved. This Court,

14 having presided over the above-captioned action and having considered the materials

15 submitted by Class Counsel in support of final approval of the settlement as well as

16 their request for attorneys' fees and costs, finds the award appropriate based on the

17 following factors:

18

a. The settlement provides substantial benefits for the class.

19

b. The requested award of attorneys' fees and expenses is within the

20 range of reasonable fees for similar class action settlements.

21

c. The requested fee is consistent with the total lodestar fees of Class

22 Counsel, based on declarations submitted to the Court.

23

d. This litigation raised numerous questions of law and fact,

24 plaintiffs' counsel was opposed by highly skilled defense counsel, the litigation was

25 intensely contested through the completion of the Settlement Agreement, and there

26 was substantial risk that plaintiffs would not prevail on some or all of their claims.

27

e. The Settlement was negotiated at arms' length and without

28 collusion, with the assistance of a highly qualified mediator.

- 27-

Case 2:07II -cv-05540-AG-AN Document 132 Filed 11/09/10 Page 6 of 7 Page ID #:1867

1

f. Under the Settlement Agreement, the attorney's fees and costs will

2 be paid by Chase in addition to the substantial benefits to the Settlement Class and

3 therefore do not reduce the amount available to Class Members from a common fund.

4

12. Class Representatives' request for approval of service payments in the

5 amount of $5,000 per Class Representative, which Chase does not oppose, is

6 approved. These payments represent appropriate compensation to the Class

7 Representatives, consistent with the value of their service to the members of the

8 Settlement Class. Under the Settlement Agreement, these amounts will be paid by

9 Chase in addition to the substantial benefits to the Settlement Class and therefore do

10 not reduce the amount available to Class Members.

~€.~O ~oT

11

13. Any person or entity wishing to appeal this Final JUdgment~post a

12 bond with this CoUrt)8 tits Mfteltnt of $

as a eenaitisfl ~

""A \ 13 tl);QS@eWti8g the ftl'l'ezt S \~ ""T~\~ '" A~ ~~~

~ G:. n.

14

14. If the Effective Date, as defined in the Settlement Agreement, does not

15 occur for any reason whatsoever, this Final Judgment and the Preliminary Approval

16 Order shall be deemed vacated and shall have no force and effect whatsoever.

17

15. Without affecting the finality of this Final Judgment in any way, this

18 Court retains continuing jurisdiction for the purpose of enforcing the Settlement

19 Agreement and this Final Judgment, and other matters related or ancillary to the

20 foregoing.

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

258195_1

- 28-

Case 2:07II -cv-05540-AG-AN Document 132 Filed 11/09/10 Page 7 of 7 Page ID #:1868

1

16. The Parties having so agreed, good cause appearing, and there being no

2 just reason for delay, it is expressly directed that this Final Judgment and Order of

3 Dismissal with Prejudice be, and hereby is, entered as a final and appealable order.

4

* * *

5

ORDER

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7 DATED: ~"~~rc1\C), 2olD~L----:::;oo"~~I--~~_ __

H

BLE,,"'J.ftIJREW 1. GUILFORD

8

UNITED STA S DISTRICT JUDGE

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 29-

 
 Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 75 Filed 08/15/08 Page 1 of 2 Page ID #:615

1 COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINS LLP
2 JOHN J. STOIA, JR. (141757) THEODORE J. PINTAR (131372)
3 LESLIE E. HURST (178432) COTY R. MILLER (255703)
4 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101-3301
5 Telephone: 619/231-1058 619/231-7423 (fax)
6 johns@csgrr.com tedp@csgrr.com
7 leslieh@csgrr.com cmiller@csgrr.com
8 BONNETT, FAIRBOURN,
9 FRIEDMAN & BALINT, P.C. ANDREW S. FRIEDMAN
10 (to seek pro hac vice admission) WENDY J. HARRISON (151090)
11 2901 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1000 Phoenix, AZ 85012
12 Telephone: 602/274-1100 602/274-1199 (fax)
13 afriedman@bffb.com wharrison@bffb.com
14 Attorneys for Plaintiff
15

CHAVEZ & GERTLER, L.L.P. MARK A. CHAVEZ (90858) JONATHAN GERTLER (111531) NANCE F. BECKER (99292) 42 Miller Avenue Mill Valley, CA 94941| Telephone: 415/381-5599 415/381-5572 (fax) mark@chavezgertler.com jon@chavezgertler.com nance@chavezgertler.com

16

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18

WESTERN DIVISION

19

ALFREDO B. PAYARES,

) No. CV-07-05540-ABC(SHx)

20

)

Plaintiff, ) CLASS ACTION

21

)

vs.

) HON. AUDREY B. COLLINS

22

)

J.P. MORGAN CHASE & CO. et al., ) ORDER TO DISMISS DEFENDANT

23

) J.P. MORGAN CHASE & CO.

Defendants. ) WITHOUT PREJUDICE

24

)

25

26

27

28

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 75 Filed 08/15/08 Page 2 of 2 Page ID #:616

1

1. J.P. Morgan Chase shall be dismissed from the Class Action Complaint

2 without prejudice;

3

2. Plaintiff reserves his right to conduct discovery regarding J.P. Morgan

4 Chase and its relationships and dealings w ith other affiliates. J.P. Morgan Chase

5 reserves its objections to plaintiff’s discovery.

6

3. The dismissal of J.P. Morgan Chase from the Clas s Action Complaint

7 without prejudice has no bearing on plaintiff’s claims against Chase Bank; and

8

4. Each side to bear its own fees and costs.

9

10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11

12 DATED: 8/15/08_______________ ____________________________________

THE HONORABLE AUBREY B. COLLINS

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 S:\CasesSD\Chase FHA\ORD 00053291.doc

 
 Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 1 of 21 Page ID #:848
EXHIBIT 1

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 2 of 21 Page ID #:849

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

THis Settlement Agreement is entered into between plaintiffs Alfredo B. Payares, Zinnia Gonzalez, and Gregory Walker ("Class Representatives" or "plaintiffs") on behalf ofthemselves and the Class Members, and defendants Chase Bank USA, N.A. and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. ("Chase" or "defendants").

RECITALS

WHEREAS, Class Representatives are the plaintiffs in an action entitled Alfredo B.

Payares, Zinnia Gonzalez, and Gregory Walker v. Chase Bank USA, NA., and JPMorgan Chase

Bank, NA., No. 07-05540-AG, United States District Court, Central District of

California (the

"Action");

WHEREAS, the Action asserts that Chase violated the Equal Credit Opportunity Act,
15 U.S.C. § 1691 et seq. ("ECOA"), and the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq.
("FHA"), in connection with the pricing of mortgage loans. Plaintiffs allege that, while race- and ethnicity-neutral, these pricing policies resulted in a disparate impact on African-American and Hispanic borrower in that they allegedly received higher-priced loans than those loans made to similarly situated non-minorities;

WHEREAS, Chase denies any and all facts and claims alleged in the Action, and further
denies that Class Representatives or any members ofthe class they purport to represent have suffered any damage;

WHEREAS, contested issues of

both law and fact exist concerning the allegations and

claims made by plaintiffs and against defendants;

WHEREAS, Class Representatives and Class Counsel have conducted an extensive formal
and informal investigation into the facts and law and have engaged in extensive arm's length settlement negotiations relating to the Action, including mediation in multiple sessions with the assistance of the Honorable Edward A. Infante (ret.) at JAMS; and

WHEREAS, Chase vigorously and expressly denies liability, but nevertheless desires to
settle the Action finally on the terms and conditions set forth herein for the purposes of avoiding the burden, expense, and uncertainty oflitigation, and putting to rest the controversies engendered by the Action;

Now, THEREFORE, in consideration of

the covenants and agreements set forth herein,

Chase and Class Representatives, on behalf ofthemselves and the purported class and through

their undersigned counsel, agree to the settlement of the Action, subject to Court approval, under

the following terms and conditions:

1. Definitions

As used in this Settlement Agreement, the terms set forth in this section in boldface type will have the following meanings:

1

~. 1
-, (-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 3 of 21 Page ID #:850

1.1 Agreement. This document, including the text and exhibits of

this Settlement

Agreement, which has been signed by the Class Representatives, Class Counsel, and Chase or its

counseL.

1.2 Class CounseL. Theodore J. Pintar, Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins
LLP; Gary E. Klein, Roddy Klein & Ryan; Andrew S. Friedman, Bonnett Fairbourn Friedman &
Balint, P.e.; Mark A. Chavez, Chavez & Gertler LLP; Donna Siegel Moffa, Barroway Topaz
Kessler Meltzer & Check, LLP; Jeffrey L. Taren, Kinoy Taren & Geraghty P.e.

1.3 Class List. A list identifying the members ofthe Settlement Class, as defined in
sections 3.1. The Class List shall identify the Settlement Class members by name and last
known address. Chase shall prepare the Class List no later than two weeks after entry of the
Preliminary Approval Order.

1.4 Class Members. All persons who fall within the Settlement Class to be certified pursuant to section 3.1 hereof.

1.5 Walker.

Class Representatives. Alfredo B. Payares, Zinnia Gonzalez, and Gregory

1.6 Confidential Information. All documents and things provided to Class Counsel

by Chase during the course of

this Action, whether by formal discovery or otherwise, including,

without limitation, all

loan files, customer information, electronic data, rate sheets, credit

information, account information, marketing materials, internal memoranda and other

communications, and all reproductions of these materials, whether photocopies, scanned copies,

electronic copies, printouts, or copies created by any other method of reproduction.

Notwithstanding the above, neither documents nor information described in this section that was

filed in the public record during the course of

this Action, unless currently under seal, shall be

Confidential Information.

1.7 Court. The Honorable Andrew J. Guilford, United States District Court Judge, Central District of California, or such other judge of the Central District of California to whom the Action may hereafter be assigned.

1.8 Delinquent. For purposes ofthis Agreement, Delinquent shall mean mortgage
loan accounts that are sixty-two (62) or more days past due.

1.9 Effective Date. The last date on which all of

the following have occurred:

(a) The Court enters a

judgment finally approving the settlement of

the Action

in a manner substantially consistent with the terms and intent of this

Agreement.

(b) Either: (i) Thirty-five (35) days have passed after completed service on

the Parties to the Action and all objectors to the settlement of

the Action,

if any, of notice of entry of the Court's judgment finally approving the

settlement of the Action, and within such time no appeal is taken or no

2
~.'/
-Ig. -

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 4 of 21 Page ID #:851

extension for such an appeal is granted, or (ii) if an appeal is taken with respect to the Court's judgment finally approving the settlement of the Action, the appellate court has by final order affirmed the Court's judgment finally approving the settlement of the Action, or has denied review, or the appellant otherwise has exhausted all appellate remedies.

1.10 Final Judgment. The Final Judgment and Order of

Dismissal with Prejudice to

be rendered by the Court consistent with this Settlement Agreement in the form attached as

Exhibit E hereto.

1.11 Parties. The Class Representatives, on behalf of
Members, and Chase.

themselves and the Class

1.12 Preliminary Approval Order. The Order of
in the form attached as Exhibit A hereto.

Preliminary Approval of

Settlement

1.13 Released Parties. Chase and its parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, successors, assignors, assignees, and/or assigns and their respective subsidiaries, affiliates, agents, successors, assignors, assignees, and/or assigns, and each oftheir respective present, former, or future officers, directors, shareholders, agents, employees, representatives,
consultants, accountants, and attorneys.

1.14 Settlement Administrator. Subject to Court approval, Tilghman & Co., P.C., at
3415 Independence Drive, Suite 102, Birmingham, AL 35209.
1.15 Term. Unless otherwise specified, this Settlement Agreement is effective for a two-year period beginning on the Effective Date.

2. Settlement Procedures

As soon as possible after the execution of

this Agreement, plaintiffs shall move the Court

for an order substantially in the form of

Exhibit A hereto: (a) preliminarily approving this

Agreement as within the range of

possible final approval as fair, adequate, and reasonable; (b)

preliminarily certifying the Settlement Class as defined in section 3.1 for settlement purposes

only; (b) setting procedures for Class Members' Claims, Opt-outs and Objections together with

deadlines for those purposes; (c) setting a final approval hearing date; and (d) approving the

manner and form of class notices described in section 3. Defendants shall file a statement of

non-opposition to that motion. If the Court certifies any classes or enters any orders relating to

Class Representatives and Class Counsel, such actions shall not be an adjudication of any fact or

issue for any purpose other than the effectuation of this Agreement and neither shall be

considered as law of

the case or res judicata nor shall have collateral estoppel effect in this or

any other proceeding. In the event that Final Approval is not achieved, the Court's orders

contemplated by this section shall be null, void, and vacated, and shall not be used or cited

thereafter by any person or entity.

3
~.l
-/3-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 5 of 21 Page ID #:852

3. The Settlement Class and Class Notice

3.1 Settlement Class. For settlement purposes only, the Parties agree that the Court
may certify a Settlement Class, defined as follows:
All African-American and Hispanic borrowers who, since August 23,2005, obtained a
mortgage loan originated through Chase's wholesale channeL.

3.2 Decertification ofthe Settlement Class if Settlement Not Approved. Ifthe

Court does not grant final approval ofthe Settlement, certification of

the Settlement Class will be

vacated, and the Parties will be returned to their positions quo ante with respect to the Action as

if the Settlement had not been entered into. In the event that Final Approval is not achieved,

(a) any Court orders preliminarily or finally approving the certification of

the Settlement Class

contemplated by the Settlement shall be null, void, and vacated, and shall not be used or cited

thereafter by any person or entity, and (b) the fact of

this Settlement, that Chase sought the

certification of any class under the Settlement, or that the Court preliminarily approved the

certification of a settlement class, shall not be used or cited thereafter by any person or entity,

including in any contested proceeding relating to the certification of any class.

3.3 Manner of Giving Notice and Class List. Chase, at its own expense, will
provide notice to the Settlement Class after preliminary approval of the Settlement by the Court. Different forms of class notice will be prepared depending on the settlement benefits to which

the Settlement Class Members are entitled. No further notice shall be required after the Court

enters a judgment finally approving the Settlement of

the Action. Chase shall compile the Class

List from its origination records. Chase, with the assistance of

the Settlement Administrator,

shall then update the Class List through the National Change of Address database. Chase, with

the assistance of

the Settlement Administrator, shall thereafter arrange to mail a stand-alone

notice substantially in the form of

Exhibit B, C, or D, as appropriate, via first-class mail, within

the time frame provided by the Court's order preliminarily approving the Settlement and such

class notices, to each Settlement Class Member. Chase shall only be required to provide a single

form of notice for each loan; the notice shall be jointly addressed to all Settlement Class

Members on the loan and mailed to the address of

the primary borrower, ifhe or she is a

Settlement Class Member, or to the co-borrower Settlement Class Member, if

the primary

borrower is not a Settlement Class Member. Chase will make a Class List available to Class

Counsel, solely for the purposes of

this Settlement, no later than thirty (30) days following entry

of an order preliminarily approving the Settlement.

3.4 Right to Void Settlement. If

more than a certain percentage of

the people

eligible for Settlement Class membership elect to opt out ofthe class ("Termination

Percentage"), Chase may elect to void this Settlement Agreement by providing written notice to

Class Counsel of such election not later than five (5) days before the Fairness Hearing, in which

case this Settlement Agreement shall be of no force and effect and the Settlement Class shall be

decertified pursuant to section 3.2. The agreement concerning the Termination Percentage will
be contained in a confidential side letter to this Agreement and will be available for in camera inspection by the Court. The Parties agree to maintain the Termination Percentage and the confidential side letter concerning the Termination Percentage in strictest confidence, except as necessary for in camera review by the Court and/or as otherwise agreed.
4

~.I

-- 1'/-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 6 of 21 Page ID #:853

4. Release of Claims

4.1 Class Claims. Upon Final Approval, Class Representatives, each Class Member

who has not opted out of the Settlement in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, and

each of their respective spouses, executors, representatives, heirs, successors, bankruptcy

trustees, guardians, wards, joint tenants, tenants in common, tenants by the entirety, co-

borrowers, agents and assigns, and all those who claim through them or who assert claims on

their behalf (including the government in its capacity as parens patriae), will be deemed to have

completely released and forever discharged the Released Parties, and each of

them, from any

claim, right, demand, charge, complaint, action, cause of action, obligation, or liability of any

and every kind, including, without limitation, those based on contract, ECOA, and/or the FHA,

or any other federal, state, or local

law, statute, regulation, or common law, including all claims

for monetary, equitable, declaratory, injunctive, or any other form of relief, whether known or

unknown, suspected or unsuspected, under the law of any jurisdiction, which Class

Representatives or any Class Member ever had, now has, or may have in the future, resulting

from, arising out of, or in any way, directly or indirectly, connected with (a) the claims raised in

the Payares Action or its related action, Gonzalez v. JPMorgan Chase, et at., No. CV08-2140

(United States District Court for the Central District of

California), and (b) claims which could

have been raised in the Payares Action or Gonzalez action based on the same transactional

nucleus of facts.

4.2 Unknown Claims. Class Representatives and Class Members each waive and

release any and all provisions, rights, and benefits conferred either (a) by section 1542 of

the

California Civil Code, or (b) by any law of any state or territory of the United States, or principle

of common law, which is similar, comparable, or equivalent to section 1542 ofthe California

Civil Code, with respect to the claims released pursuant to section 4.1. Section 1542 of

the

California Civil Code reads:

Section 1542. General Release, extent. A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him or her must have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor.

Class Representatives and Class Members may hereafter discover facts other than or different from those that they know or believe to be true with respect to the subject matter ofthe claims released pursuant to the terms of section 4.1, but each of those individuals expressly agrees that, upon entry ofthe Final Judgment, he or she shall have waived and fully, finally, and forever settled and released any known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, asserted or unasserted, contingent or non-contingent claim with respect to the claims released pursuant to section 4.1, whether or not concealed or hidden, without regard to subsequent discovery or existence of such different or additional facts.

4.3 Bar to Future Suits. Class Representatives, and Class Members who do not opt
out in accordance with the Settlement, shall be enjoined from prosecuting any legal proceeding against any Released Party with respect to the claims released in section 4 or actions taken by a Released Party that are authorized or required by this Agreement or by the Final Judgment. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the judgment, releases, and bar to suits contemplated by
5

£-x/. s(-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 7 of 21 Page ID #:854

the Settlement. It is further agreed that the Settlement may be pleaded as a complete defense to any proceeding subject to this section.

5. Classwide Settlement Benefits

5.1 Settlement benefits will vary based on the loan status of Settlement Class Member as follows:

5.1.1 Paid-Off Borrowers. A Settlement Class Member whose loan is paid off

(whether by proceeds of

sale, refinance, or foreclosure) as of

the date the Class

List is prepared and who submits a claim meeting the requirements of section 5.2

shall be Eligible, at his or her election, to claim one of

the following two benefits:

(1) a $300 credit toward the closing costs of or (2) a check for $70. Eligible Paid-Off

his or her next Chase mortgage loan, Borrowers will only be entitled to one

benefit per loan. Eligible Paid-Off Settlement Class Members who have or are

co-borrowers will be entitled to submit only one claim form per loan, the benefits

of which shall be issued jointly, with either the credit or the check being issued

jointly in the Eligible Paid-Off

Settlement Class Members' names.

5.1.2 Existing Non-Delinquent Borrowers. A Settlement Class Member

whose loan is outstanding, but not Delinquent, as of

the date the Class List is

prepared and who submits a claim meeting the requirements of section 5.2 shall

be Eligible, at his or her election, to claim one of

the following two benefits: (1) a

$300 credit toward the closing costs of

his or her next Chase mortgage loan, or (2)

a check for $90. Eligible Existing Non-Delinquent Borrowers will only be

entitled to one benefit per loan. Eligible Existing Non-Delinquent Settlement

Class Members who have or are co-borrowers will be entitled to submit only one

claim form per loan, the benefits of

which shall be issued jointly, with either the

credit or check being issued jointly in the Eligible Existing Non-Delinquent

Settlement Class Members' names.

An Existing Non-Delinquent Borrower who submits such a claim shall not be entitled to any further benefits under the Settlement. An Existing Non-Delinquent Borrower who does not submit such a claim is eligible for Red Carpet Access to loan modification services, in the event that such services later become necessary, as described in section 5.5.

5.1.3 Existing Delinquent Borrowers. Those Settlement Class Members
whose loans are outstanding, but Delinquent, as ofthe date the Class List is prepared are entitled to Red Carpet Access to loan modification services, as discussed further in section 5.5.

5.2 Eligibility. In order to demonstrate that he or she is Eligible for settlement

benefits, each Paid-Off

Borrower and Existing Non-Delinquent Borrower must certify that, to the

best of his or her knowledge, the information the borrower provided in connection with his or her

loan application was accurate. The certification shall be in the form provided on Exhibits B

andC.

6

~"X. (
-/(,-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 8 of 21 Page ID #:855

5.3 Mailing of Checks to Eligible Class Members who Claim Them. Checks to

Eligible Paid-Off

Borrowers and Existing Non-Delinquent Borrowers who claim them will be

issued and mailed by and in the name of Chase or the Settlement Administrator, with the cost of

such mailing paid by Chase. All such checks shall be mailed within thirty (30) days ofthe

Effective Date of this Settlement Agreement and shall contain a notation stating that they must

be cashed within ninety (90) days of issuance. The Settlement Administrator shall certify to the

Court that all checks were issued in the amounts required by section 5.1 and mailed within the

timeframe provided herein, all of

which shall be subject to review by Class CounseL. Ifthe

Court's approval ofthe Settlement does not become final, no cash payment will be made.

5.4 Closing Cost Credits to Eligible Class Members who Claim Them. Eligible

Paid-Off Borrowers and Existing Non-Delinquent Borrowers who claim the $300 closing cost

credit will be issued and mailed a certificate for the credit. All such certificates shall be mailed

within thirty (30) days of

the Effective Date ofthis Settlement Agreement and shall contain a

notation stating they will be good for two (2) years from the Effective Date ofthis Settlement

Agreement.

5.5 Red Carpet Access. Red Carpet Access to loan modification services will

include: (1) dedicated 800 numbers (one for English speakers and one for Spanish speakers),

which will be posted on the Settlement Website and reserved for Class Members seeking loan

modifications, (2) with dedicated personnel, (3) who have both fair lending training and training

regarding the Settlement, and (4) some of

whom have Spanish language skills. Additionally,

Red Carpet Access will entitle each person whose request for a loan modification is denied to an

automatic secondary review of

the deniaL. Red Carpet Access will be available to Eligible Class

Members for two (2) years after the Effective Date ofthis Settlement.

Nothing in this Settlement Agreement shall be construed to constitute a waiver of any

rights that Settlement Class Members may otherwise have to participate in any of

Chase's

otherwise-existing loan modification or foreclosure prevention programs. That said, nothing in

this section shall be read as limiting the scope of

the Settlement Class Members' release,

contained in section 4.

Nothing in this Settlement Agreement shall be construed to require Chase to alter, in any way, its loan modification standards. Nor shall anything in this Settlement Agreement be construed as preventing Chase from altering, in any way, its loan modification standards. Red Carpet Access involves only special access to Chase's otherwise-existing loan modification or foreclosure prevention programs.

5.6 Quarterly Reports to Class CounseL. During the two (2) years that the Red
Carpet Access program is in effect, Chase shall prepare quarterly reports for Class Counsel, indicating the number of Settlement Class borrowers who applied for loan modifications via Red Carpet Access, in addition to how many of those requests were approved or denied, and, to the extent readily available, the reasons for the denials in categorical form.

5.7 Settlement Website. The Settlement Administrator, in consultation with Class

Counsel, will be responsible for maintaining the Settlement Website, although Chase is entitled

to approve the form of

the website before it is established. Copies ofthis Settlement Agreement,

7

~x.1 - 17-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 9 of 21 Page ID #:856

in addition to the notices called for in section 3.3, will be available on the Settlement Website. Additionally, the Settlement Administrator in consultation with Class Counsel will be responsible for translating the notices called for in section 3.3 into Spanish, which the Settlement Administrator will then post on the Settlement Website. The Settlement Website shall be operative on the date the class notices are mailed and shall remain in operation until at least two

(2) years from the Effective Date of

the Settlement.

6. Attorneys' Fees and Litigation Expenses and Reimbursements

6.1 Attorneys' Fees. Class Counsel agree to request approval of attorneys' fees and

litigation expenses and reimbursements in an aggregate amount not to exceed $1.95 million.

Chase will not oppose any such request and will pay any fees and costs approved by the Court in

an aggregate amount that does not exceed $1.95 million, within thirty (30) days after the

Effective Date. Chase will not appeal any award of

fees and costs that does not exceed $1.95

million.

6.2 Service Payment to Class Representatives. Class Representatives agree to request approval of service payments in an amount not to exceed $5,000 per Class Representative. Chase will not oppose any such request and will pay each Class Representative
a service payment approved by the Court in an amount that does not exceed $5,000, within thirty
(30) days after the Effective Date. Chase will not appeal any award of a service payment to a
Class Representative that does not exceed $5,000.

7. Dismissal

of Litigation

The Class Representatives, on behalf of

themselves and the Class Members, consent to

the dismissal of the Action with prejudice in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. The

Parties hereby stipulate to the entry of

the Final Judgment.

8. Continuing Jurisdiction

The Court shall have continuing jurisdiction, during the Term of this Agreement, to
enforce this Agreement's terms, and to enforce the Final Judgment.

9. Return of Confidential Information and Other Discovery

Class Counsel acknowledge that during the course ofthe Action, they have received Confidential Information. No later than thirty (30) days after the Effective Date, Class Counsel will either return to Chase or destroy all Confidential Information and will certify under oath that they and their agents do not retain any copies or summaries or compilations or indices of such information.

This provision is not intended to cover work product of Class Counsel but is intended to
cover Confidential Information that might simply be attached to any work product.

Class Counsel also will not use any of

the Confidential Information learned or obtained in

this Action for any purpose after the Effective Date.

8

Æx .1
- /(-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 10 of 21 Page ID #:857

10. Non-Disparagement

Class Counsel and Class Representatives agree to refrain from disparaging Chase and its

parent company, subsidiaries, affiliates, successors, or assigns with respect to any issue related to

this case. Class Counsel and Class Representatives agree to refrain from taking any action

designed to harm the public perception of

Chase and its parent company, subsidiaries, affiliates,

successors, or assigns regarding any issue related to this case, except they may provide sworn

testimony if so required by an order from a court of competent jurisdiction. Chase agrees to

refrain from disparaging Class Representatives publicly or in the media regarding any issue

related to this case. Failure to abide by this provision will constitute a breach of

this Settlement

Agreement.

11. Press Release

Any press release either Party issues relating to the Settlement must be jointly prepared

by the Parties to the satisfaction of one another. Such a press release shall be the only

communication either Party shall make regarding the Settlement, other than in pleadings

submitted to the Court relating to the Settlement, or as may be necessary to prepare tax

documents or respond to inquiries from governmental agencies or courts. Nothing in this

provision is intended to limit Class Counsel's obligation to provide accurate information and/or

legal advice to any plaintiff or to members of

the Settlement Class.

12. Notices

Any communication, verification, or notice sent by Class Counselor a Party in connection with this Settlement Agreement shall be effected by facsimile and U.S. mail as follows:

To Class Counsel:

To Chase:

Theodore J. Pintar Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101
Fax: (619) 231-7423

Michael J. Agoglia Morrison & Foerster LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94105 Fax: (415) 268-7522

With a copy to:
Gary E. Klein Roddy Klein & Ryan 727 Atlantic Ave. 2d Floor Boston, MA 02111
Fax: (617) 357-5030

9
&x. J -1"9-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 11 of 21 Page ID #:858

13. Miscellaneous

13.1 Entire Agreement. This Agreement and the Exhibits hereto contain the entire agreement between the Parties and supersede all prior understandings, agreements, or writings

regarding the subject matter of

this Agreement.

13.2 No Liability. This Agreement does not constitute, is not intended to constitute, and will not under any circumstances be deemed to constitute, an admission by either Party as to
the merits, validity, or accuracy, or lack thereof, of any ofthe allegations or claims in this Action. This Agreement does not constitute a waiver of any defenses or affirmative defenses that Chase or its successor may be entitled to assert in any future litigation, including the applicable statute of limitations.

13.3 Invalidity on Modification or Disapproval. In the event any court disapproves
or sets aside this Settlement Agreement or any material part hereof for any reason, or holds that it will not enter or give effect to the Final Judgment without modification, or holds that the entry of the Final Judgment or any material part thereof should be overturned or modified in any material way, then:

(A) If all Parties do not agree jointly to appeal such ruling, this Settlement Agreement will become null and void, and the Action will continue, and the Parties will stipulate to a joint motion (i) that any and all orders entered pursuant to this Settlement Agreement be vacated, and (ii) that any and all dismissals pursuant to this Agreement be vacated; or

(B) ifthe Parties do agree to jointly appeal such ruling and ifthe Final Judgment or its equivalent in all material respects is not in effect after the termination of all proceedings arising out of such appeal, this Agreement will become null and void, and the Action will continue, and the Parties will stipulate to a joint motion (i) that any and all orders entered pursuant to this Agreement be vacated, including, without limitation, any order modifying the class certification order or permitting amendment of the complaint to conform the complaint to the class definition set out in section 3.1, and (ii) that any and all dismissals pursuant to this Agreement be vacated.
13.4 Amendment. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by a written instrument signed by all Parties or their successors in interest or their duly authorized representatives.

14. Representations and Warranties
14.1 No Additional Persons with Financial Interest. Class Representatives and Class Counsel warrant and represent that they are not aware of any persons (natural or legal) having any interest in any award of attorneys' fees, costs, and litigation expenses in connection with the Action other than Class CounseL. Class Representatives and Class Counsel agree to indemnify Chase and to hold Chase harmless from payment of any demand or claim by any
10
£;c. I

- ~t::J

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 12 of 21 Page ID #:859

person (natural or legal) for an award of attorneys' fees, costs, and litigation expenses in connection with the Action or this Settlement, including those made by a person claiming such an award based on the representation of, or assistance with the representation of, Alfredo Payares, Zinnia Gonzalez, Tynya Beverly, Gregory Walker, or Ana Cordero, or any class those
individuals purported to represent.

14.2 Parties Authorized to Enter into Settlement Agreement. Class
Representatives and Chase represent and warrant that he, she, or it is fully authorized to enter into this Agreement and to carry out the obligations provided for herein. Each person executing this Agreement on behalf of a Party covenants, warrants, and represents that he or she is and has been fully authorized to do so by such Party. Each Party hereto further represents and warrants
that he, she, or it intends to be bound fully by the terms of this Agreement.

14.3 No Attempt by Parties to Object. Class Representatives, Class Counsel and Chase each represent and warrant that they have not attempted, nor will they attempt, (a) to void this Agreement in any way, or (b) to solicit, encourage, or assist in any fashion any effort by any
person (natural or legal) to object to the Settlement under this Agreement.

14.4 Best Efforts. The Parties agree that the terms of

this Settlement Agreement

reflect a good-faith settlement of disputed claims. Class Counsel, Class Representatives, and

Chase consider the Settlement effected by this Agreement to be fair and reasonable and will use

their best efforts to seek approval of this Settlement Agreement by the Court, including in

responding to any objectors, intervenors, or other persons or entities seeking to preclude the final

approval of this Settlement Agreement.

14.5 Time Periods. The time periods and dates described in this Agreement with respect to the giving of notices and hearings are subject to Court approval and modification by

the Court or by written stipulation of

the Parties.

14.6 Governing Law. This Agreement is intended to and shall be governed by the laws of the State of California.

14.7 No Construction Against Drafter. This Agreement shall be deemed to have
been drafted by the Parties, and any rule that a document shall be interpreted against the drafter
shall not apply to this Agreement.
14.8 Agreement Binding on Successors in Interest. This Agreement shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the respective heirs, successors, and assigns of the Parties.

14.9 Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement shall become effective upon its
execution by the Parties, Class Counsel, and counsel for Chase. The Agreement may be executed in counterparts. Each counterpart shall be deemed to be an original, and execution of
counterparts shall have the same force and effect as if all Parties had signed the same instrument.
In addition, signature by facsimile will constitute sufficient execution of this Settlement
Agreement.

11
fl(. I
-~I

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 13 of 21 Page ID #:860

':': :'..
,,' : .
....' .:.
. . ::'.... ~:.'

M. tl~"L,t Cf". . .Dated;'. Febtiiatj .~ 2010

.::.:'." ; . ~ ~ '.

Datéd: Feb~ry ~ lCHO

. '" .,'
~:.' ..':.' . .' ,,~~. .... '.' Dated: ~~201.0'

.:: .

::,'
Dated: Janl;1aI'y......,... 2010

Fax:

Feb 25 201Q 11 ;27am PO01/001

CHASE B~ USA, N.A,
Br-~
Its: :::!d' h ~ . ~ fe.v15
~~ . JPMORGAN C!!P¡1E ~ANK, NA By: . \ . 1 DJ1VlD :. (), "/.::.t(J.lß/fJW
.
Its:
MORRISON & FOERSTER;LP / .,' '"
ll, ,/"'.' .
~/.¡. /, By: é " ~¿.' 11-/ · I '''l' '/;.'. .' 1Z ..' ,: n'''''' . t"'" . . 1.../ . 'IMìc~lJ;Ägopa'. "'/~ .
Attorneys for Defendants: . '. .
CHASE BANK USA,.N.A. and JP MORGAN
. CHASEB~:N.A .... .
....

Dated: January.:.....J 2010

Alfredo B.Payares
Plaintiff/Class R~resentative
ZimiìaGonzalez
Plaintiff/Class Represe;ntative'

",.:. . .. '" ......

12

Lx.

I

-~:i. -

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 14 of 21 Page ID #:861

Dated: January -,2010
Dated: January _,2010 Dated: January _' 2010
Dated: January _' 2010
Dated: January -' 2~1O

CHASE BANK. USA, N.A.
By: Its:
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK., N.A.
By: Its: MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
By: Michael J. Agoglia
Attorneys for Defendants
CHASE BANK. USA, N.A. and JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.
A1fredo~et ~
Plaintiff/Class Representative
Zinnia Gonzalez Plaintiff/Class Representative

12
¿'ye. /
-;13 -

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 15 of 21 Page ID #:862

Dated: January _,2010
Dated: January ---y 2010
Dated: January _,2010
Dated: January _,2010 Dated: January 1-, 2010

CHASE BANK USA, N.A.
By: Its:
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.
By: Its: MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
By: Michael J. Agoglia
Attorneys for Defendants
CHASE BANK USA, N.A. and JP MORGAN
CHASE BANK, N.A.
Alfredo B. Payares Plaintiff/Class Representative
z~
Plaintiff/Class Representative

41.2 /
-;i. '1-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 16 of 21 Page ID #:863

Dated: January 31, 2010 Dated: January -,2010
Dated: January _,2010
Dated: January _' 2010
Dated: January _,2010

!!:::s tJ¿kv
Plaintiffì'Class Representative
COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINSLLP

By:

xtdZA:) Theodore 1. Pintar

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

RODDY

KLEIN & RYAN

By: Gary E. Klein
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
BONNETT FAIRBOURN
FRIEDMAN & BALINT, P.C.

By:

Andrew S. Friedman

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

CHAVEZ & GERTLER LLP

By: Mark A. Chavez
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
13
L)(.!
-;1~-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 17 of 21 Page ID #:864

Dated: January ---J 2010
Dated: Jan~ ---J 2010
Dated; January ~20 1 0
Pated: January ---J 2010
Dated: January ---J 2010

Gregory Walker

Plaintiff/Class Representative

COUGJI1IN STOIA GELLER
ROBBINS LLP

RUDMAN &

By:

Theodore J. Pintar

AttomeY$ for Plaintiffs

~OPDYKLE1N & RYAN
&~iY~ " . . . . '.. ......:.
By:

Attorneys forPlall1tiffs

BONNETT FAlRBOURN
FRiEDMAN & aALINT, P.C.

By: Andrew S. Friedman
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
CHAVEZ & GERTLER LLP

By: Mark A. Chavez
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
13
£x. /
-.,." -

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 18 of 21 Page ID #:865

Dated: January _,2010
Dated: January ~ 2010 Dated: January _,2010 Dated: January _,2010 Dated: January ~ 2010

Gregory Walker
PlaliitifUClass ltepresentative
COUGHLIN STOIA GELLElt RUDMAN & ROBBINSLLP

By:

Theodore J. Pintar

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

RODDY KLEIN & RYAN

By:

Gary E. Klein

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

BONNE FRIED

By:

Andrew S. Friedman

Attorneys for Plaliitiffs

CRA VEZ & GERTLElt LLP

By: Mark A. Chavez Attorneys for Plaintiffs
13
4. -/~7-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 19 of 21 Page ID #:866

Dated: January _' 2010 Dated: January -,2010
Dated: January -,2010
Dated: January _,2010
Dated: January~ 2010

Gregory Walker
PlaintiffïClass Representative
COUGHLIN STOIA GELLER RUDMAN & ROBBINSLLP

By: Theodore 1. Pintar
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
RODDY KLEIN & RYAN

By:

Gary E. Klein

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

BONNETT FAIRBOURN
FRIEDMAN & BALINT, P.C.

By: Andrew S. Friedman

Attomeys for Plaintiffs

CHAVEZ & GERTLER LLP
B~~

Mark A. Chavez

(

Attomeys for Plaintiffs

13
Lx. /
-;1.1'-

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 20 of 21 Page ID #:867

Øo. ,.
Dated: Jtmnmoy~, 2010
Dated: January _,2010

BARROW A Y TOPAZ KESSLER MELTZER & CHECK, LLP
BY:~ Donn Siegel Moffa
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
KINOY TAREN & GERAGHTY P.C.

~

By: Jeffrey L. Taren
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

14
£~.I .
-;i.~

Case 2:07-cv-05540-AG-AN Document 100-1 Filed 03/10/10 Page 21 of 21 Page ID #:868

Dated: January -,2010 Dated: January 22,2010

BARROW

A Y TOPAZ KESSLER

MELTZER & CHECK, LLP

By: Donna Siegel Moffa
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
KINOY TAREN & GERAGHTY P.C,

14
£.)(./
_ 3t:J-

 
 Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 1 of 15 (ANx), CLOSED, DISCOVERY, MANADR, RELATED−G
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (Western Division − Los Angeles)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:07−cv−05540−AG−AN

Alfredo B Payares v. J.P. Morgan Chase &Co et al Assigned to: Judge Andrew J. Guilford Referred to: Magistrate Judge Arthur Nakazato Related Case: 8:07−cv−00794−AG−AN Cause: 42:1981 Civil Rights
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 08/23/2007 Date Terminated: 11/09/2010 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Alfredo B Payares

represented by Alan R Plutzik Bramson Plutzik Mahler &Birkhaeuser, LLP 2125 Oak Grove Road Suite 120 Walnut Creek, CA 94598 925−945−0200 Email: aplutzik@bramsonplutzik.com TERMINATED: 03/02/2010 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Andrew S Friedman Bonnett Fairbourn Friedman &Balint PC 2901 North Central Avenue Suite 1000 Phoenix, AZ 85012−3311 602−274−1100 Fax: 602−798−5860 Email: afriedman@bffb.com LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Coty R Miller Robbins Geller Rudman and Dowd LLP 655 West Broadway Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 619−231−1058 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Edward W Ciolko Kessler Topaz Meltzer and Check LLP 280 King of Prussia Road Radnor, PA 19087 610−667−7706 Fax: 610−667−7056 Email: eciolko@ktmc.com LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Gary E Klein Klein Kavanagh Costello, LLP 85 Merrimac St., 4th Floor Boston, MA 02114−4715 617−357−5500 x 15 Fax: 617−357−5030 Email: klein@kkcllp.com LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 2 of 15
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
John J Stoia , Jr Robbins Geller Rudman &Dowd LLP 655 West Broadway Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101−3301 619−231−1058 Fax: 619−231−7423 Email: johns@rgrdlaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Jonathan E Gertler Chavez &Gertler LLP 42 Miller Avenue Mill Valley, CA 94941 415−381−5599 Email: jon@chavezgertler.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Lisa Fialco Chavez and Gertler LLP 42 Miller Avenue Mill Valley, CA 94941 415−381−5599 Fax: 415−381−5572 Email: lisa@chavezgertler.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mark A. Chavez Chavez &Gertler LLP 42 Miller Avenue Mill Valley, CA 94941 415−381−5599 Fax: 415−381−5572 Email: mark@chavezgertler.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Nance F Becker Chavez &Gertler LLP 42 Miller Avenue Mill Valley, CA 94941 415−381−5599 Email: nance@chavezgertler.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Peter A Muhic Kessler Topaz Meltzer &Check, LLP 280 King of Prussia Road Radnor, PA 19087 610−667−7706 Fax: 610−667−7056 Email: pmuhic@ktmc.com LEAD ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Theodore J Pintar Robbins Geller Rudman &Dowd LLP 655 West Broadway Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101−3301

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 3 of 15
619−231−1058 Fax: 619−231−7423 Email: tedp@rgrdlaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Wendy J Harrison Bonnett Fairbourn Friedman and Balint PC 2901 North Central Avenue Suite 1000 Phoenix, AZ 85012 602−274−1100 Fax: 602−798−5858 Email: wharrison@bffb.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Leslie Hurst Blood Hurst &O'Reardon LLP 701 B Street, Suite 1700 San Diego, CA 92101 619−338−1100 Fax: 619−338−1101 Email: lhurst@bholaw.com TERMINATED: 01/20/2010 ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant J.P. Morgan Chase &Co TERMINATED: 08/15/2008
Defendant Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.
Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank NA

represented by Michael J Agoglia Morrison and Foerster 425 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94105−2484 415−268−6057 Email: magoglia@mofo.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Wendy Marie Garbers Morrison &Foerster 425 Market St San Francisco, CA 94105−2482 415−268−7000 Email: wgarbers@mofo.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael J Agoglia (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Wendy Marie Garbers (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael J Agoglia (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 4 of 15

Wendy Marie Garbers (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 08/23/2007 08/23/2007 08/23/2007 08/23/2007 08/23/2007 09/19/2007 09/21/2007
09/21/2007
09/24/2007
10/23/2007
12/01/2007 01/29/2008 01/30/2008 01/31/2008
02/20/2008

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT against defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A..(Filing fee $ 350)Fee Paid, filed by plaintiff Alfredo B Payares.(bb) (Entered: 09/04/2007)
NOTICE OF FILING FEE DUE on Pro Hac Vice Application mailed to attorney Andrew S Friedman for Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (bb) (Entered: 09/04/2007)
2 Notice of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (bb) (Entered: 09/04/2007)
3 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF ADR PILOT PROGRAM filed.(bb) (Entered: 09/04/2007)
20 days Summons Issued re Complaint − (Discovery) 1 as to Alfredo B Payares. (bb) (Entered: 09/04/2007)
7 APPLICATION of Andrew S Friedman for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. FEE PAID. filed by plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. Lodged Order. (esa) (Entered: 09/26/2007)
4 ORDER by Judge Audrey B. Collins on Application of Non−Resident Attorney Andrew S Friedman of Bonnett Fairbourn Friedman &Balint PC for Alfredo B Payares and designating Mark Chavez of Chavez Gertler GRANTED. (ir) (Entered: 09/24/2007)
5 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to J.P. Morgan Chase &Co and Chase Bank U.S.A., N.A. answers now due on or before 10/29/2007 filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co; Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A..(ir) (Entered: 09/24/2007)
6 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by plaintiff Alfredo B Payares, upon Chase Bank U.S.A., N.A. served on 8/31/2007; answer due 9/20/2007; The Summons and Complaint were served by PERSONAL service, by NOT INDICATED statute, upon DIONNE WILSON, LEGAL ADMINISTRATOR; Due Dilligence declaration NOT INDICATED; Original Summons NOT RETURNED. (esa) (Entered: 09/25/2007)
8 STIPULATION to Extend Time to amend and to Set Case Management Conference; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED by Judge Audrey B. Collins that Plaintiff shall have until 1/4/08 to file any amendment of the complaint as of right; the initial case management conference shall be held on 3/24/087 (es) (Entered: 10/23/2007)
9 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Theodore J Pintar, John J Stoia, Jr on behalf of Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (et) (Entered: 01/15/2008)
10 STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer to February 25, 2008 filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A..(Garbers, Wendy) (Entered: 01/29/2008)
11 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Leslie Hurst on behalf of Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares (Hurst, Leslie) (Entered: 01/30/2008)
12 Stipulation to Extend Time to Respond to Complaint; ORDER by Judge Audrey B. Collins as to defendant J.P. Morgan Chase &Co. IT IS SO ORDERED that the defendants shall have until February 25, 2008, to answer or otherwise respond to the complaint. (es) (Entered: 02/01/2008)
13 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents. The following deficiency was found proposed documnet was not submitted as separate attachment;Stipulation has order attached which should have been submitted as an

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 5 of 15

02/21/2008 02/22/2008
02/28/2008 03/11/2008 03/11/2008 03/11/2008 03/11/2008 03/14/2008 03/14/2008
03/18/2008 03/18/2008 03/19/2008 03/20/2008 03/25/2008

attachment.: RE Stipulation to Extend Time to Answer (More than 30 days) 10 (ab) (Entered: 02/21/2008)
14 STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer to March 7, 2008 filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Garbers, Wendy) (Entered: 02/21/2008)
15 ORDER Re Stipulation to Extend Time to Respond to Complaint, Set Briefing Schedule and Hearing 14 , IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants shall have until 3/7/08 to respond to the operative complaint; Rule 12 motion(s) must be filed by 4/7/08; Any repl(ies) regarding Rule 12 motion(s) must be filed by 4/21/08; and the hearing on defendants' Rule 12 motion(s) is set for Monday, 5/5/08 at 10:00am. (es) (Entered: 02/25/2008)
16 NOTICE of Change of Attorney Information for attorney John J Stoia, Jr counsel for Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. Changing e−mail to johns@csgrr.com. Filed by plaintiff Alfredo B. Payares (Stoia, John) (Entered: 02/28/2008)
17 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A..Motion set for hearing on 5/5/2008 at 10:00 AM before Judge Audrey B. Collins. (Garbers, Wendy) (Entered: 03/11/2008)
18 MEMORANDUM in Support of MOTION to Dismiss Case 17 filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Michael J. Agoglia# 2 Proposed Order Granting Motion to Dismiss)(Garbers, Wendy) (Entered: 03/11/2008)
19 Certificate of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. (Garbers, Wendy) (Entered: 03/11/2008)
20 Certificate of Interested Parties filed by Defendant J.P. Morgan Chase &Co. (Garbers, Wendy) (Entered: 03/11/2008)
21 NOTICE Notice of Change of Attorney Information filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 03/14/2008)
22 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan Report and Case Management Conference Statement ; estimated length of trial 20 days, filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares, Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A... (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Pre−Trial Scheduling)(Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 03/14/2008)
23 First APPLICATION OF NON−RESIDENT ATTORNEY Gary Klein for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice. FEE NOT PAID. filed by plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Order on Application of Non−Resident Attorney to Appear in a Specific Case)(Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 03/18/2008)
24 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Theodore J Pintar on behalf of Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 03/18/2008)
25 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents. The following deficiency was found Incorrect event selected. Correct event is Notice−Change of Attorey Information (G−06): RE Notice (Other) 21 (es) (Entered: 03/19/2008)
26 ORDER by Judge Audrey B. Collins, On First APPLICATION OF NON−RESIDENT ATTORNEY Gary Klein for Leave to Appear In A Specific Case. FEE NOT PAID. 23 (es) (Entered: 03/21/2008)
27 ORDER RE: CONFERENCE: 1. PRETRIAL CONFERENCE PURSUANT TO F.R.CIV.P. 16 AND 26; AND LOCAL RULE 26; 2. MOTIONS AND EX PARTE APPLICATIONS; 3. EFILING−COURTESY COPIES by Judge Audrey B. Collins: This matter is set for Pretrial/Scheduling Conference on 6/23/2008 at 10:00 AM (See attached order for further details and requirements). (es) (Entered: 03/26/2008)

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 6 of 15

04/07/2008 04/08/2008
04/08/2008 04/08/2008 04/08/2008 04/09/2008 04/21/2008 04/24/2008 04/25/2008 04/25/2008 05/05/2008
05/05/2008 05/12/2008

28 OPPOSITION to MOTION to Dismiss Case 17 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 04/07/2008)
29 MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS ORDER held before Judge Audrey B. Collins: On March 11, 2008, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss. Although the Court receivedcourtesy copies of Plaintiffs Opposition filed on April 7, the Court has yet to receive courtesy copies of the moving papers. Defendants are hereby ORDERED to deliver to chamber two courtesy copies of all moving papers by Friday, April 11, 2008. The Court reminds the parties of the following requirements: (SEE ATTACHED MINUTES FOR REQUIREMENTS) (es) (Entered: 04/08/2008)
30 NOTICE AND REQUEST of Settlement Procedure Selection (Sp3); parties request to appear before a retired judicial officer or other dispute resolution body for mediation type settlement proceedings. Filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares, Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.(Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 04/08/2008)
31 Joint REQUEST for Settlement Approval of Settlement Procedure JOINT NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT PROCEDURE filed by DEFENDANT Alfredo B Payares, J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. (Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 04/08/2008)
32 NOTICE JOINT NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT PROCEDURE filed by DEFENDANTS Alfredo B Payares, J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. (Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 04/08/2008)
33 MINUTES: JOINT NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT PROCEDURE (In Chambers); The Court hereby STRIKES the parties Settlement Procedure Selection 30 , 31 , 32 SO ORDERED by Judge Audrey B. Collins (ir) (Entered: 04/10/2008)
34 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case Defendants' Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A..Motion set for hearing on 5/5/2008 at 10:00 AM before Judge Audrey B. Collins. (Garbers, Wendy) (Entered: 04/21/2008)
35 MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS ORDER held before Judge Audrey B. Collins re: MOTION to Dismiss Case 34 : Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, currently set for hearing on May 5, 2008 is continued, due to Court congestion, to Monday, May 19, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. (ps) (Entered: 04/24/2008)
36 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Appointment of Counsel [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 filed by plaintiff Alfredo B Payares.Motion set for hearing on 5/19/2008 at 10:00 AM before Judge Audrey B. Collins. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 04/25/2008)
37 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 filed by plaintiff Alfredo B Payares.Motion set for hearing on 5/19/2008 at 10:00 AM before Judge Audrey B. Collins. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1)(Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 04/25/2008)
38 OPPOSITION to MOTION for Appointment of Counsel [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 36 , MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 37 filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. (Garbers, Wendy) (Entered: 05/05/2008)
39 DECLARATION of Wendy M. Garbers In Support Of Defendants' Opposition to Motion For Entry of Proposed Pre−Trial Order No. 1 38 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 36 filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1)(Garbers, Wendy) (Entered: 05/05/2008)
40 REPLY In Support MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 37 filed

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 7 of 15

05/12/2008 05/12/2008 05/12/2008 05/12/2008 05/13/2008 05/13/2008 05/13/2008
05/14/2008 05/15/2008
05/19/2008

by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 05/12/2008)
41 DECLARATION of Theodore J. Pintar In Support of Reply MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 37 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 05/12/2008)
42 DECLARATION of Leslie E. Hurst In Support of Reply MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 37 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 05/12/2008)
43 DECLARATION of Edward W. Ciolko In Support of Reply MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 37 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 05/12/2008)
44 DECLARATION of Gary Klein In Support of Reply MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 37 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 05/12/2008)
45 NOTICE OF ERRATA filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. correcting Declaration (Motion related), Declaration (Motion related) 43 (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 05/13/2008)
46 DECLARATION of Edward W. Ciolko Corrected, In Support of Reply MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel Memorandum in Support of [Proposed] Pre−Trial Order No. 1 37 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 05/13/2008)
47 MINUTES OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR ENTRY OF PRE−TRIAL ORDER(In Chambers) held before Judge Audrey B. Collins :Pending before the Court is a Motion for Entry of Pre−Trial Order No. 1 (Motion), filed on April 25, 2008. Defendants filed an Opposition on May 5, 2008, and Plaintiff filed a Reply on May 12, 2008. The Court finds this Motion appropriate for resolution without oral argument and VACATES the hearing set for May 19, 2008. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b); Local Rule 7−15. Having considered the materials submitted by the parties and the case file, the Court hereby DENIES the Motion without prejudice. (see attached minutes for further details) 36 (es) (Entered: 05/13/2008)
48 NOTICE Notice of Supplemental Authority Regarding Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 05/14/2008)
49 MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS ORDER held before Judge Audrey B. Collins re MOTION to Dismiss Case 17 : The Court finds that the motion is appropriate for submission without oral argument and VACATES the hearing set for May 19, 2008. The Court hereby GRANTS Defendants motion to dismiss as to Plaintiffs Second and Third Causes of Action, for racial discrimination under 42 U.S.C. sections 1981 and 1982, with leave to amend. The motion is otherwise DENIED. Plaintiff shall have 30 days from the date of this order in which to file an amended complaint (see document for further details). (bm) (Entered: 05/15/2008)
50 MINUTES OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE RELATED CASES (IN CHAMBERS) held before Judge Audrey B. Collins: The two above−captioned cases are presently pending before this Court. The Court has learned that two potentially related cases are pending before another judge of this district. Those cases, before Judge Guilford, are National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Ameriquest Mortgage Company et al., CV−07−0794 AG (ANx) (NAACP), and Freddy Ramon Chavez Toruno v. HSBC Finance Corporation et al., CV−07−5998 AG (ANx) (Toruno). The Court therefore ORDERS counsel in both

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 8 of 15

05/28/2008 05/28/2008 05/30/2008 05/30/2008 06/09/2008 06/16/2008 06/16/2008 06/17/2008
06/18/2008 06/23/2008

Payares and Gonzalez to show cause, in writing, why Payares and Gonzalez are not related to NAACP and Toruno, the cases pending before Judge Guilford. The form of response may be either: (1) the filing of Notices of Related Case, or (2) an explanation why Payares and Gonzalez are not related, within the meaning of the local rule, to NAACP and/or Toruno, the cases before Judge Guilford. Responses must be filed no later than Wednesday, May 28, 2008. (see attached minutes for further details and requirements) (es) (Entered: 05/20/2008)
51 NOTICE of Related Case(s) filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. Related Case(s): 8:2007cv00794, 2:2007cv05998 (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 05/28/2008)
52 NOTICE of Related Case(s) filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. Related Case(s): CV−07−0794 AG, CV−07−5998 AG (Garbers, Wendy) (Entered: 05/28/2008)
53 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Leave to Appeal May 15, 2008 Order And For Stay Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. 1292(b) filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. Motion set for hearing on 6/23/2008 at 10:00 AM before Judge Audrey B. Collins. (Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 05/30/2008)
54 MEMORANDUM in Support of MOTION for Leave to Appeal May 15, 2008 Order And For Stay Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. 1292(b) MOTION for Leave to Appeal May 15, 2008 Order And For Stay Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. 1292(b) 53 filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Michael J. Agoglia, # 2 Proposed Order)(Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 05/30/2008)
55 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to MOTION for Leave to Appeal May 15, 2008 Order And For Stay Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. 1292(b) MOTION for Leave to Appeal May 15, 2008 Order And For Stay Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. 1292(b) 53 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 06/09/2008)
56 JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan and Case Management Conference Statement ; estimated length of trial 3−60 days, filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares, Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A... (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Proposed Pre−Trial Scheduling)(Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 06/16/2008)
57 REPLY In Support Of MOTION for Leave to Appeal May 15, 2008 Order And For Stay Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. 1292(b) MOTION for Leave to Appeal May 15, 2008 Order And For Stay Pursuant To 28 U.S.C. 1292(b) 53 filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix A)(Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 06/16/2008)
59 MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS ORDER held before Judge Audrey B. Collins re DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION AND A STAY PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) 53 : The Court finds that the motion is appropriate for submission without oral argument and VACATES the hearing set for June 23, 2008. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b); Local Rule 7−15. (Note, however, that the Scheduling Conference also set for June 23, 2008, shall remain on calendar.) Having considered the materials submitted by the parties and the case file, the Court hereby DENIES the Motion for Certification and a Stay Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). (See document for text of order.) (ps) (Entered: 06/17/2008)
60 NOTICE of Change of Attorney Information for attorney Theodore J Pintar counsel for Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. Adding Coty R. Miller as attorney as counsel of record for Alfredo B. Payares for the reason indicated in the G−06 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B. Payares (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 06/18/2008)
61 CIVIL JURY TRIAL ORDER by Judge Audrey B. Collins,, Set Deadlines: The above matter is set for trial before the Honorable Audrey B. Collins. Pretrial and Trial Dates. The Court orders the following dates: Cut−off date for filing motions to join other parties and amending the pleadings is 8/18/2008. Discovery cut−off is 6/30/09. Class−certificaiton motion cut−off date for motions to be filed is Monday, 1/5/09. (see attached order for further details and requirements) (es) (Entered:

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 9 of 15

06/23/2008
06/30/2008 06/30/2008 06/30/2008 07/02/2008
07/14/2008 07/17/2008 07/22/2008
07/23/2008 08/11/2008 08/12/2008

06/25/2008)
62 MINUTES: Scheduling Conference held. The Court sets the following dates: Add Claims/Parties cut−off 8/18/2008; Discovery cut−off 6/30/2009; Expert Discovery cut−off 10/30/09; Expert reports Cut−off 7/30/09; Expert report rebuttal cut−off 9/30/09; Law &Motion cut−off of Class Certification motion 1/5/2009; Counsel are reminded of the requirement of Local Rule 16−14. Couunsel shall submit their notice of settlement selection within 10 days by Judge Audrey B. Collins. Court Reporter: Katherine Stride. (ir) (Entered: 06/25/2008)
63 NOTICE of Settlement Procedure Selection filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. (Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 06/30/2008)
64 ANSWER to Complaint − (Discovery) 1 DEFENDANT CHASE BANK USA, N.A.'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A..(Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 06/30/2008)
65 ANSWER to Complaint − (Discovery) 1 DEFENDANT JPMORGAN CHASE &CO.'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A..(Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 06/30/2008)
66 MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS ORDER held before Judge Audrey B. Collins re Joint Notice of Settlement Procedure: On June 30, 2008, the parties filed another Notice of Settlement Procedure. The notice indicates that the parties select settlement procedure number 1 (mediation before a judge or magistrate judge). However, as explained in the Court's April 9, 2008 minute order addressing the parties' previous Notice of Settlement Procedure, the case has already been assigned to Alternative Dispute Resolution. As such, the only options available to the parties are Alternative Dispute Resolution or private mediation (option number 3.) The Court therefore STRIKES the June 30 notice (docket no. 63 ) and ORDERS the parties to file a new notice selecting either ADR or private mediation as their settlement procedure. The new notice must be filed no later than July 14, 2008. (bm) (Entered: 07/03/2008)
67 NOTICE filed by Plaintiff &Defendants Alfredo B Payares, J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. of Settlement Procedure Selection (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 07/14/2008)
68 STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Rule 12 Motion Addressed to Answer, Set Briefing Schedule and Hearing filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order to Extend Time to File Rule 12 Motion Addressed to Answer, Set Briefing Schedule and Hearing)(Hurst, Leslie) (Entered: 07/17/2008)
69 ORDER by Judge Audrey B. Collins: 1. The time for plaintiff to file Rule 12 motions shall be extended to August 11, 2008. 2. Any oppositions by defendants to plaintiffs Rule 12 motions shall be filed August 25, 2008. 3. Any reply by plaintiff regarding their Rule 12 motions shall be filed September 8, 2008.4. The parties shall meet and confer at least 10 days before plaintiff is dueto file Rule 12 motions, or no later than August 1, 2008; 5. The hearing on plaintiffs Rule 12 motions shall be September 22, 2008, at 10:00 a.m. (ir) (Entered: 07/23/2008)
70 NOTICE Notice of Appearance filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Fialco, Lisa) (Entered: 07/23/2008)
71 STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Rule 12 Motions Addressed to Answers filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order To Extend Time to File Rule 12 Motions Addressed to Answers, Set Hearing Schedule and Hearing)(Hurst, Leslie) (Entered: 08/11/2008)
72 ORDER TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE RULE 12 MOTIONS ADDRESSED TO ANSWERS, SET BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING by Judge Audrey B. Collins GRANTING Stipulation for Extension of Time to File, 71 ; Setting Deadlines/Hearings:(Motion filing deadline of 8/25/2008; any oppositions shall be filed by 9/8/08, and any replies shall be filed by 9/22/08 with a hearing on

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 10 of 15

08/14/2008 08/14/2008 08/15/2008
08/19/2008 10/08/2008
10/16/2008 12/08/2008 12/15/2008 12/15/2008 01/08/2009 01/16/2009
01/16/2009

plaintiff's Rule 12 motions set on 10/6/2008 at 10:00 AM or as soon thereafter as the Court may hear the matter.(pp) (Entered: 08/13/2008)
73 Joint STIPULATION to Dismiss Defendant J.P. Morgan Chase &Co filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order To Dismiss Defendant J.P. Morgan Chase &Co. Without Prejudice)(Hurst, Leslie) (Entered: 08/14/2008)
74 STIPULATION to AMEND ANSWERS filed by Defendants J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A..(Garbers, Wendy) (Entered: 08/14/2008)
75 ORDER by Judge Audrey B. Collins re Stipulation to Dismiss Party [73. J.P. Morgan Chase &Co shall be dismissed from the Class Action Complaintwithout prejudice. Plaintiff reserves his right to conduct discovery regarding J.P. Morgan Chase and its relationships and dealings with other affiliates. J.P. Morgan Chase reserves its objections to plaintiffs discovery. The dismissal of J.P. Morgan Chase from the Class Action Complaint without prejudice has no bearing on plaintiffs claims against Chase Bank; and Each side to bear its own fees and costs. (ir) (Entered: 08/15/2008)
76 AMENDED ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Defendant Chase Bank USA, N.A.'s Amended Answer To Plaintiff's Class Action Complaint filed by Defendant Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. (Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 08/19/2008)
77 ORDER RE TRANSFER PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 08−05 −Related Case− filed. Related Case No: SACV07−794 AG (ANx). Case transfered from Judge Audrey B. Collins and Magistrate Judge Stephen J. Hillman to Judge Andrew J. Guilford and Magistrate Judge Arthur Nakazato for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge CV07−5540 AG (ANx).Signed by Judge Andrew J. Guilford (at) (Entered: 10/08/2008)
78 ORDER Re Early Meeting of Parties and Scheduling Conference by Judge Andrew J. Guilford, ( Scheduling Conference set for 12/15/2008 09:00 AM before Judge Andrew J. Guilford.) (ade) (Entered: 10/17/2008)
79 STATEMENT Supplemental Joint Rule 26(f) Report and Case Management Conference Statement filed by Defendant Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A. (Garbers, Wendy) (Entered: 12/08/2008)
80 SCHEDULING ORDER by Judge Andrew J. Guilford, Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings:( Discovery cut−off 10/30/2009. Final Pretrial Conference set for 6/28/2010 08:30 AM before Judge Andrew J. Guilford. Jury Trial set for 7/20/2010 09:00 AM before Judge Andrew J. Guilford.) (ade) (Entered: 12/18/2008)
81 MINUTES OF Scheduling Conference held before Judge Andrew J. Guilford. A Final Pretrial Conference is set for 06/28/10 at 8:30 a.m. A Jury Trial is set for 07/20/10 at 9:00 a.m. Court sets the length of trial at 20 days. Scheduling Order Specifying Procedures is signed and filed this date. (See minute order for further details)Court Reporter: Donald Hilland. (db) (Entered: 12/18/2008)
82 Joint STIPULATION to Amend Complaint − (Discovery) 1 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A (First Amended Class Action Complaint), # 2 Proposed Order)(Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 01/08/2009)
83 ORDER by Judge Andrew J. Guilford, REGARDING FILING of AMENDED COMPLAINT and DESIGNATION of CO−LEAD PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL: 1. The Amended Complaint is ordered filed this date; 2. After the Amended Complaint is filed, plaintiffs in the Gonzalez action, CV−08−02140 AG(ANx), shall dismiss their Complaint without prejudice; 3. Defendants shall file a response to the Amended Complaint by February 10, 2009. (See document for further details.) IT IS SO ORDERED. (rla) (Entered: 01/16/2009)
84 NOTICE OF DOCUMENT DISCREPANCIES AND ORDER by Judge Andrew J. Guilford ORDERING First Amended Class Action Complaint received on 1/14/2009 to be filed and processed; filing date is to be today. (lwag) (Entered: 01/16/2009)

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 11 of 15

01/16/2009 02/10/2009 02/10/2009 03/12/2009 03/12/2009 03/17/2009 03/17/2009
04/17/2009 04/24/2009
01/20/2010 03/01/2010 03/02/2010

85 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT against Defendant Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A. amending Complaint − (Discovery) 1 . Filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares (lwag) (Entered: 01/16/2009)
86 ANSWER to Amended Complaint 85 Defendant Chase Bank USA, N.A.'s Answer to Plaintiffs' First Amended Class Action Complaint filed by Defendant Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A..(Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 02/10/2009)
87 ANSWER to Amended Complaint 85 Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.'s Answer to Plaintiffs' First Amended Class Action Complaint filed by Defendant Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A..(Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 02/10/2009)
88 APPLICATION for attorney Peter A. Muhic to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV Fee of $185 receipt number 09730000000005023629 paid.) filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate in Good Standing, # 2 Proposed Order)(Plutzik, Alan) (Entered: 03/12/2009)
89 APPLICATION for attorney Edward W. Ciolko to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV Fee of $185 receipt number 09730000000005023975 paid.) filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Good Standing, # 2 Proposed Order)(Plutzik, Alan) (Entered: 03/12/2009)
90 ORDER by Judge Andrew J. Guilford, Granting APPLICATION for attorney Edward W. Ciolko to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV Fee of $185 receipt number 09730000000005023975 paid.) APPLICATION for attorney Edward W. Ciolko to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV Fee of $185 receipt number 09730000000005023975 paid.) 89 (dmjr) (Entered: 03/18/2009)
91 ORDER by Judge Andrew J. Guilford Granting APPLICATION for attorney Peter A. Muhic to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV Fee of $185 receipt number 09730000000005023629 paid.) APPLICATION for attorney Peter A. Muhic to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV Fee of $185 receipt number 09730000000005023629 paid.) 88 Peter A. Muhic to appear on behalf of Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. Alan R. Plutzik is designated as local counsel. Fee PAID. (dg) (Entered: 03/18/2009)
92 Joint STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Case Deadlines filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order to Extend Case Deadlines)(Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 04/17/2009)
93 ORDER by Judge Andrew J. Guilford, TO EXTEND CASE DEADLINES: IT IS ORDERED THAT the pre−trial and trial schedule in this matter is modified as follows: (Discovery cut−off 1/29/2010, Motions due by 6/22/2010, Final Pretrial Conference set for 9/27/2010 08:30 AM, Jury Trial set for 10/19/2010 09:00 AM) (See document for further details.) IT IS SO ORDERED. (rla) (Entered: 04/24/2009)
94 NOTICE of Change of Attorney Information for attorney Theodore J Pintar counsel for Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares.Leslie E. Hurst is no longer attorney of record for the aforementioned party in this case for the reason indicated in the G−06 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff Theodore J. Pintar (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 01/20/2010)
95 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Withdraw Appearance Motion for Withdrawal of Appearance of Alan R. Plutzik, Esq. and the Law Offices of Bramson Plutzik Mahler &Birkhaeuser, LLP and [Proposed] Order filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Plutzik, Alan) (Entered: 03/01/2010)
96 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: MOTION to Withdraw Appearance Motion for Withdrawal of Appearance of Alan R. Plutzik, Esq. and the Law Offices of Bramson Plutzik Mahler &Birkhaeuser, LLP and [Proposed] Order MOTION to Withdraw Appearance Motion for Withdrawal of Appearance of Alan R. Plutzik, Esq. and the Law Offices of Bramson Plutzik Mahler &Birkhaeuser, LLP and [Proposed] Order 95 . The following error(s) was found: Hearing information is missing and Proposed Document was not submitted as a separate attachment. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 12 of 15

03/02/2010 03/10/2010 03/10/2010 03/10/2010 03/10/2010 03/11/2010
03/25/2010 03/30/2010 04/05/2010 04/21/2010
05/07/2010 05/07/2010

you to do so. (rrp) (Entered: 03/02/2010)
97 ORDER by Judge Andrew J. Guilford: GRANTING Motion for Withdrawal of Appearance of Alan R. Plutzik, ESQ and The Law Offices of Bramson Plutzik Mahler &Birkhaeuser, LLP 95 . (rla) (Entered: 03/03/2010)
98 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Settlement Approval of Class Action , Preliminary filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. Motion set for hearing on 4/26/2010 at 10:00 AM before Judge Andrew J. Guilford. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 03/10/2010)
99 MEMORANDUM in Support of MOTION for Settlement Approval of Class Action , Preliminary 98 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 03/10/2010)
100 DECLARATION of Theodore J. Pintar in Support of Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement MOTION for Settlement Approval of Class Action , Preliminary 98 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 1 Ex. A, # 3 Exhibit 1 Ex. B, # 4 Exhibit 1 Ex. C, # 5 Exhibit 1 Ex. D, # 6 Exhibit 2)(Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 03/10/2010)
101 DECLARATION of Gary Klein in Support of Preliminary Approval MOTION for Settlement Approval of Class Action , Preliminary 98 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 03/10/2010)
102 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Memorandum in Support of Motion 99 . The following error(s) was found: Local Rule 11−8 Memorandum/brief exceeding 10 pages shall contain table of contents and table of authorities. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (rrp) (Entered: 03/11/2010)
103 DECLARATION of Hon. Edward A. Infante In Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Approval of Class Action Settlement MOTION for Settlement Approval of Class Action , Preliminary 98 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 03/25/2010)
104 NOTICE of Change of firm name by Theodore J Pintar attorney for Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. Changing firm name to Robbins Geller Rudman &Dowd LLP. Filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 03/30/2010)
105 NOTICE OF NON−OPPOSITION to MOTION for Settlement Approval of Class Action , Preliminary 98 Chase Bank USA, N.A. and JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.'s Statement of Non−Opposition to Unopposed Motion For Preliminary Approval Of Class Settlement filed by Defendant Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A.. (Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 04/05/2010)
106 MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS ORDER by Judge Andrew J. Guilford, CONTINUING HEARING AND INVITING FURTHER BRIEFING: For the reasons that follow, the hearing on Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement (Motion) in Payares v. Chase Bank USA, N.A., CV 07−5540 AG (ANx), currently scheduled for April 26, 2010, is CONTINUED to May 17, 2010 at 10:00 a.m.. NAACP, the Payares Plaintiffs, and Chase should have a chance to comment on the Court's concerns. Accordingly, the Court encourages these parties to submit supplemental briefing by May 7, 2010. Such briefs shall not exceed 5 pages. The parties in Payares should also provide declarations concerning whether they know of any other cases that will be affected by approval of the Payares settlement. (rla) (Entered: 04/21/2010)
107 SUPPLEMENT to MOTION for Settlement Approval of Class Action , Preliminary 98 Memorandum in Response to The Court's April 21, 2010 Order filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 05/07/2010)
108 SUPPLEMENT to MOTION for Settlement Approval of Class Action , Preliminary 98 Supplemental Declaration of Hon. Edward A. Infante (Ret.) in Support of Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 13 of 15

05/07/2010 05/17/2010
05/17/2010 07/16/2010
07/28/2010 07/28/2010 09/02/2010 09/03/2010 09/03/2010 09/03/2010 09/03/2010 09/03/2010

Settlement filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 05/07/2010)
109 RESPONSE filed by Defendants Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A., JPMorgan Chase Bank NAto Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive − no proceeding held, Terminate Deadlines and Hearings, Set Motion and RRDeadlines,,,,,,,,, 106 April 21, 2010 Order re Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Of Wendy M. Garbers)(Garbers, Wendy) (Entered: 05/07/2010)
110 MINUTES OF Hearing held before Judge Andrew J. Guilford re Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement 98 . Court and counsel discuss the matter. Motion for preliminary approval is GRANTED. A Final Fairness Hearing is set for September 13, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. Order of Preliminary Approval of Settlement is signed and filed this date. Court Reporter: Denise Paddock. (db) (Entered: 05/17/2010)
111 ORDER of Preliminary Approval of Settlement by Judge Andrew J. Guilford. (See Order for details) (db) (Entered: 05/18/2010)
112 TRANSCRIPT for proceedings held on 051710 DCCD GUILFORD CR 10D PAYARES. Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder: DENISE PADDOCK, phone number WWW.OCRECORD.COM. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER WWW.PACERTRANSCRIPTS.COM. Notice of Intent to Redact due within 7 days of this date. Redaction Request due 8/6/2010. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 8/16/2010. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 10/14/2010. (Paddock, Denise) (Entered: 07/16/2010)
113 NOTICE OF FILING TRANSCRIPT filed for proceedings 051710 DCCD GUILFORD CR 10D PAYARES (Paddock, Denise) (Entered: 07/28/2010)
114 NOTICE OF DISCREPANCY AND ORDER: by Judge Andrew J. Guilford, ORDERING Malik Bey's Ex Parte App for TRO, Proof of Service, Notice of Intention received on 7/22/2010 is not to be filed but instead rejected. Denial based on: Bey is not a party to the action, documents not properly filed. (lwag) (Entered: 07/29/2010)
115 STIPULATION for Hearing re Final Approval of Class Action Settlement filed by Plaintiffs Chase Bank U.S.A.., N.A., J.P. Morgan Chase &Co, JPMorgan Chase Bank NA, Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order re Preliminary Approval of Settlement)(Chavez, Mark) (Entered: 09/02/2010)
116 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Attorney Fees Costs, and Expenses and Approval of Class Representative Service Awards filed by plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. Motion set for hearing on 9/13/2010 at 10:00 AM before Judge Andrew J. Guilford. (Chavez, Mark) (Entered: 09/03/2010)
117 DECLARATION of Joint Declaration of Counsel In Support Of MOTION for Attorney Fees Costs, and Expenses and Approval of Class Representative Service Awards 116 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibits 1−4, # 2 Exhibit Exhibits 5−7)(Chavez, Mark) (Entered: 09/03/2010)
118 MEMORANDUM in Support of MOTION for Attorney Fees Costs, and Expenses and Approval of Class Representative Service Awards 116 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Chavez, Mark) (Entered: 09/03/2010)
119 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Appendix Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal)(Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 09/03/2010)
120 DECLARATION of Theodore J. Pintar Regarding Class Member Correspondence MOTION for Attorney Fees Costs, and Expenses and Approval of Class Representative Service Awards 116 filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Exhibit 11, # 12 Exhibit 12, # 13 Exhibit 13, # 14 Exhibit 14, # 15 Exhibit 15, # 16 Exhibit 16, # 17 Exhibit 17, # 18 Exhibit 18, # 19 Exhibit 19, # 20 Exhibit 20, # 21

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 14 of 15

09/10/2010 09/13/2010 09/13/2010 09/15/2010 11/02/2010 11/02/2010 11/02/2010 11/08/2010 11/09/2010 11/09/2010 11/11/2010

Exhibit 21, # 22 Exhibit 22, # 23 Exhibit 23, # 24 Exhibit 24, # 25 Exhibit 25, # 26 Exhibit 26, # 27 Exhibit 27, # 28 Exhibit 28, # 29 Exhibit 29)(Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 09/03/2010)
121 SUPPLEMENT to MOTION for Attorney Fees Costs, and Expenses and Approval of Class Representative Service Awards 116 Supplemental Declaration of Theodore J. Pintar filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B)(Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 09/10/2010)
122 NOTICE OF LODGING filed Notice of Lodging of Revised Proposed Supplemental Order Re Approval of Settlement re Stipulation for Hearing, 115 (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Revised Proposed Supplemental Order Re Approval of Settlement, # 2 Exhibit to Revised Proposed Supplemental Order)(Agoglia, Michael) (Entered: 09/13/2010)
123 MINUTES held before Judge Andrew J. Guilford re Final Fairness Hearing and Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney Fees, Costs and Expenses and Approval of Class Representative Service Awards. Court and counsel discuss this matter. The final fairness hearing and motion for attorney fees are continued to November 8, 2010 at 10:00 a.m. before Judge Andrew J. Guilford. Court Reporter: Denise Paddock. (jba) (Entered: 09/14/2010)
124 REVISED SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER RE APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT by Judge Andrew J. Guilford, re Preliminary Approval Order 111 . The Court supplements and amends thePreliminary Approval Order. (See document for details.) IT IS SO ORDERED. (rla) (Entered: 09/15/2010)
125 SUPPLEMENT to MOTION for Attorney Fees Costs, and Expenses and Approval of Class Representative Service Awards 116 Plaintiffs' Supplemental Memorandum in Further Support of Class Action Settlement and Award of Attorneys Fees and Expenses filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 11/02/2010)
126 DECLARATION of Theodore J. Pintar In Support of MOTION for Attorney Fees Costs, and Expenses and Approval of Class Representative Service Awards 116 and in Further Support of Final Approval filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 11/02/2010)
127 DECLARATION of L. Stephens Tilghman In Support of MOTION for Attorney Fees Costs, and Expenses and Approval of Class Representative Service Awards 116 and Regarding Supplemental Class Notice filed by Plaintiff Alfredo B Payares. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Pintar, Theodore) (Entered: 11/02/2010)
128 MINUTES OF Motion Hearing rer Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees, Costs and Expenses and Approval of Class Representative Service Awards and Final Fairness Hearing held before Judge Andrew J. Guilford. Court and counsel confer re the settlement. The Court approves the settlement and grants the motion for attorneys fees. A separate order shall be issued.Court Reporter: Denise Paddock. (db) (Entered: 11/10/2010)
130 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Andrew J. Guilford re Supplemental Order Granting Class Action Attorney Fees. The Court finds that the requested attorney fee and cost award is reasonable and therefore grants the request. (See Order for details) (db) (Entered: 11/12/2010)
132 FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE by Judge Andrew J. Guilford. It Is Ordered that This Court approves the Settlement and all terms set forth in the Settlement Agreement. Any person wishing to appeal this Final Judgment need not post a bond with this Court, since this has been waived. See Order for further information. RE 129 (MD JS−6, Case Terminated). (twdb) (Entered: 11/14/2010)
129 NOTICE OF LODGING filed of Joint Submission of Revised [Proposed] Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice re Memorandum in Support of Motion 118 , Order on Motion for Attorney Fees, Motion Hearing,, 128 , Memorandum in Support of Motion 119 (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Pintar,

Case: 2:07-cv-5540 As of: 10/25/2012 07:51 PM PDT 15 of 15

11/12/2010
03/11/2011 03/11/2011

Theodore) (Entered: 11/11/2010)
131 TRANSCRIPT for proceedings held on 091310 DCCD GUILFORD CR 10D PAYARES. Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder: DENISE PADDOCK, phone number WWW.OCRECORD.COM. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER WWW.PACERTRANSCRIPTS.COM. Notice of Intent to Redact due within 7 days of this date. Redaction Request due 12/3/2010. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 12/13/2010. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 2/10/2011. (Paddock, Denise) (Entered: 11/12/2010)
133 NOTICE OF FILING TRANSCRIPT filed for proceedings 051710 DCCD GUILFORD CR 10D PAYARES G46 www.pacertranscripts.com (Paddock, Denise) (Entered: 03/11/2011)
134 NOTICE OF FILING TRANSCRIPT filed for proceedings 091310 DCCD GUILFORD CR 10D PAYARES G46 www.pacertranscripts.com (Paddock, Denise) (Entered: 03/11/2011)