Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_10-cv-03118/USCOURTS-cand-4_10-cv-03118-34/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1446 Petition for Removal

---

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

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

MAUDER and ALICE CHAO; 

DEOGENESO and GLORINA PALUGOD;

And MARITZA PINEL, individually and

on behalf all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

AURORA LOAN SERVICES, LLC,

Defendant.

Case No: C 10-3118 SBA

ORDER RE UNTIMELY OPT-OUT 

REQUESTS

In connection with their motion for final approval, Plaintiffs have requested that the 

Court accept the untimely opt-out requests of two class members identified as Claim No. 

AUCH1-100030939 (Smith) and No. AUCH1-100065171 (Chapin). See Errata to Pls.’ 

Not. of Mot. and Mot. for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement at 2 n.1 (Dkt. 250); 

Am. Loeser Decl. ¶ 9 & Ex. C (Dkt. 252, 252-3). While conceding that the requests were 

postmarked after the December 15, 2014 deadline, Plaintiffs contend that the Court should 

deem them valid on the ground that both class members previously expressed a desire to 

opt out of the settlement. 

The Court’s preliminary approval order unequivocally states that: “Any person who 

wishes to exclude themselves from the Settlement Class must do so by written request to 

the Settlement Administrator postmarked no later than [December 15, 2014].” Order 

Granting Unopposed Mot. for Prelim. Approval of Class Action Settlement at 14, Dkt. 225 

(emphasis added). Thus, irrespective of any intention previously expressed by these 

individuals to Class Counsel, it was incumbent upon them to submit their opt-out requests 

within the time-period specified in the Court’s order. In addition, no extenuating 

Case 4:10-cv-03118-SBA Document 258 Filed 01/20/15 Page 1 of 2
- 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

circumstances have been presented to excuse their untimeliness. See Silber v. Mabon, 

18 F.3d 1449, 1455 (9th Cir. 2011) (applying standard for excusable neglect to an untimely 

opt-out). Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiffs’ request for the Court to accept the 

untimely opt-outs of the two class members identified above is DENIED. The Class Lists, 

which are attached as Exhibits A and B to the Amended Declaration of Thomas E. Loeser 

in Support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement (Dkt. 257, 

252), shall be revised and resubmitted to the Court to include both of the two borrowers 

discussed above whom the Court finds are bound by the settlement agreement. Exhibit C to 

the aforementioned declaration also shall be revised and resubmitted to exclude both 

borrowers from the list of class members who have opted out of the settlement. The 

resubmitted lists shall be in the form of a stipulation and proposed order and shall be filed 

within two days of the date this order is filed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 1/20/15 ______________________________

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:10-cv-03118-SBA Document 258 Filed 01/20/15 Page 2 of 2