Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-02078/USCOURTS-cand-3_10-cv-02078-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Breach of Contract

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL R. OUELLETTE, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 10-02078 JSW

ORDER REGARDING

DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR A

CONTINUANCE

Defendants filed a request for a twenty-one day extension to file an opposition to

Plaintiffs’ application for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”). However, Defendants did not

state that they would agree to postpone the scheduled trustee sale. The Court will provide

Defendants an extension, but only on the condition that they agree to postpone the trustee sale

until July 9, 2010. If Defendants agree to this postponement, Defendants shall have until June

9, 2010 to file an opposition. Plaintiffs shall then file a reply, if any, by June 16, 2010. The

Court will hold a hearing on Plaintiffs’ TRO on July 2, 2010. By 1:00 p.m. on May 19, 2010,

Defendants shall file a statement attesting to their agreement to postpone the trustee sale.

If Defendants will not agree to postpone the trustee sale, Defendants shall file their

opposition by 1:00 p.m. on May 19, 2010 and appear for the hearing at 4:00 p.m. scheduled for

same day.

The Court has received Plaintiffs’ response to the Order to Show Cause (“OSC”). 

Although Plaintiffs failed to comply fully with the Court’s Order, the Court will not dismiss 

Case 3:10-cv-02078-JSW Document 17 Filed 05/19/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Plaintiffs’ complaint. However, Plaintiffs are admonished that any future violations of the 

Court’s orders, including missing filing deadlines, will be sanctioned, to be paid by Plaintiffs’

counsel.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 19, 2010 /s/ 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-02078-JSW Document 17 Filed 05/19/10 Page 2 of 2