Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00671/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00671-32/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 371
Nature of Suit: Truth in Lending
Cause of Action: 15:1601 Truth in Lending

---

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

DAVID VAN SLYKE, FRANKLIN CHAN

and THOMAS E. BROWNING, on behalf of

themselves and all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

CAPITAL ONE BANK, CAPITAL ONE

FINANCIAL CORPORATION, and

DOES 1–100, inclusive,

Defendants. /

No. C 07-00671 WHA

REQUEST RE MOTIONS FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Counsel for both sides will please clarify whether defendants have used, within the

statute of limitations, any cross-default on multiple credit cards held by the named plaintiffs,

i.e., charging fees on all accounts if only one account is in default. The Court remembers Mr.

McCabe saying at the hearing that no such practice existed. The summary judgment record

does not seem to contain proof on this point, the defense resting on full disclosure and

plaintiffs’ not opening multiple accounts within the statute of limitations. If, however, the

practice was fully disclosed, how can defendants say it never existed? 

Both sides should respond no later than TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2007, AT 5:00 P.M.

Responses must be a maximum of five double-spaced pages. Supplementing the record is not

permitted. 

Dated: November 6, 2007. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:07-cv-00671-WHA Document 425 Filed 11/06/07 Page 1 of 1