Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-02519/USCOURTS-casd-3_16-cv-02519-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 12:2601 Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) (findings &amp; purpose)

---

1

16cv2519-GPC (BLM)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ZARAH KIMBLE, SEHER BASAK, and 

SARAH SAKINAH GROZA O'LOUGHLIN, 

individually and on behalf of all others 

similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SPECIALIZED LOAN SERVICING, LLC,

Defendant.

Case No.: 16cv2519-GPC (BLM)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S EX 

PARTE MOTION TO STAY THE 

SCHEDULING ORDER

[ECF No. 85]

On April 20, 2018, Plaintiffs filed an ex parte motion requesting this Court to stay the 

deadlines in the Scheduling Order [ECF No. 42], “pending resolution of Plaintiffs’ Motion to 

Withdraw as Named Plaintiffs and Substitute Nick Nikki as Named Plaintiff (‘Motion to Withdraw 

and Substitute’) [ECF No. 63].” ECF No. 85. In support, Plaintiffs state that they are currently 

unable to obtain the discovery necessary to properly prepare for the mandatory settlement 

conference scheduled for April 30, 2018 and to move for class certification by the May 7, 2018 

deadline. Id. at 2. Plaintiffs further state that if District Judge Curiel grants the Motion to 

Withdraw and Substitute, Plaintiffs should have the opportunity to gather the needed discovery 

afterwards. Id. at 3. Defendants did not file an opposition to the motion. See Docket.

/ / /

Case 3:16-cv-02519-GPC-BLM Document 89 Filed 04/26/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2

16cv2519-GPC (BLM)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

On April 20, 2018, after the instant motion was filed, District Judge Curiel issued an Order 

Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion to Withdraw as Named Plaintiffs and Substitute Nick Nikki as Named 

Plaintiff. ECF No. 86. 

On April 23, 2018, the parties filed a joint motion to continue the mandatory settlement 

conference by thirty days. ECF No. 87. The parties stated that Plaintiffs “are exploring their 

options with respect to dismissing the litigation.” Id. at 2. On April 24, 2018, the Court issued 

an Order Granting the Joint Motion to Continue the Mandatory Settlement Conference. 

ECF No. 88. 

In light of Judge Curiel’s order denying Plaintiffs’ Motion to Withdraw and Substitute and 

the order continuing the mandatory settlement conference, Plaintiffs’ ex parte motion to stay 

the Scheduling Order is DENIED as moot.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 4/26/2018

Case 3:16-cv-02519-GPC-BLM Document 89 Filed 04/26/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2