Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02953/USCOURTS-caed-2_11-cv-02953-20/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 18:1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act

---

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 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CHRISTOPHER D. SCHNEIDER, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

BANK OF AMERICA N.A, BANK OF 

AMERICA MORTGAGE, BANK OF 

AMERICA HOME LOANS SERVICING 

LP, BALBOA INSURANCE CO., HOME 

RETENTION GROUP, QUALITY 

RETENTION GROUP, QUALITY LOAN 

SERVICE CORP., CLIFF COLER, DOES 

1-40, 

Defendants. 

No. 2:11-cv-2953-JAM-EFB PS 

ORDER 

 This case was before the court on May 13, 2015, for hearing on three separate motions: 

(1) defendant Quality Loan Service Corp.’s (“Quality”) motion to compel plaintiff’s discovery 

responses, to deem matters admitted, and for an award of reasonable attorney’s fees, ECF No. 

174; (2) plaintiff’s motion to modify the court’s November 18, 2014 scheduling order, ECF No. 

188; and (3) plaintiff’s motion to stay this case, ECF No. 191. Attorney Alison Lippa appeared 

on behalf of defendants Bank of America, N.A., Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, and 

Balboa Insurance Co.; attorney Seth Harris appeared on behalf of Quality. Plaintiff, who is 

proceeding in pro se, appeared by telephone. 

Case 2:11-cv-02953-JAM-EFB Document 206 Filed 05/13/15 Page 1 of 2
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 

2

 After careful consideration of the moving and opposing papers and the arguments at the 

hearing, and for the reasons stated on the record, plaintiff’s motion to stay is denied. Further, 

Quality’s motions to compel, to deem matters admitted, and for an award of reasonable attorney’s 

fees are granted. 

 On or before May 27, 2015, plaintiff shall serve responses to Quality’s Interrogatories and 

produce documents responsive to Quality’s Request for Production of Documents. The Requests 

for Admissions served on plaintiff (see ECF No. 145 Ex. 2) are deemed admitted. Further, within 

7 days of this order, Quality shall submit a declaration detailing the reasonable expenses it 

incurred in bringing its motion to compel. 

It is further ordered that plaintiff shall appear for and cooperate in the taking of his 

deposition. The deposition shall occur at the time and place for which it was duly noticed. 

 Plaintiff’s motion to modify the scheduling order is granted in part and denied in part. 

The deadline for disclosures of experts is extended as follows: The parties shall serve their initial 

expert disclosures upon all other parties on or before June 12, 2015; rebuttal expert disclosures 

shall be served on or before July 10, 2015. Plaintiff’s motion to modify is otherwise denied. 

So Ordered. 

DATED: May 13, 2015. 

Case 2:11-cv-02953-JAM-EFB Document 206 Filed 05/13/15 Page 2 of 2