Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-02497/USCOURTS-cand-3_16-cv-02497-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gladys Chan
Plaintiff
Wayne Chan
Plaintiff
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Defendant

Document Text:

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

STIPULATION TO EXTEND STAY OF ACTION PENDING LOAN MODIFICATION REVIEW

Joseph E. Addiego III (CA SBN 169522)

John D. Freed (CA SBN 261518)

DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP

505 Montgomery Street, Suite 800

San Francisco, California 94111

Telephone: (415) 276-6500

Facsimile: (415) 276-6599

Email: joeaddiego@dwt.com 

jakefreed@dwt.com

Attorneys for Defendant

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

WAYNE CHAN, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

) 

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 16-cv-02497-EMC

STIPULATION TO EXTEND STAY OF 

ACTION PENDING LOAN 

MODIFICATION REVIEW; 

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Case 3:16-cv-02497-EMC Document 31 Filed 10/20/16 Page 1 of 4
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

STIPULATION TO EXTEND STAY OF ACTION PENDING LOAN MODIFICATION REVIEW

WHEREAS, on April 6, 2016, Plaintiffs filed this action against Defendant JPMorgan 

Chase Bank, N.A. (“Chase”) in the California Superior Court, San Mateo County;

WHEREAS, May 9, 2016, Chase removed this action to this Court;

WHEREAS on July 21, 2016, Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”);

WHEREAS, on July 14, 2016, Plaintiffs submitted a loan modification application to 

Chase for consideration; 

WHEREAS, on July 22, 2016, the parties stipulated to stay this action for 90 days pending 

the outcome of Plaintiffs’ loan modification review;

WHEREAS, on July 22, 2016, the Court entered the stay, and ordered the parties to submit 

a status report within 90 days, advising the Court of (a) the status of Plaintiffs’ loan modification 

application; and the (b) the parties’ positions on whether the stay should remain in force or active 

litigation resumed.

WHEREAS, although Plaintiffs’ loan modification review process remains ongoing, the 

parties remain optimistic that this litigation may be resolved informally in the event Chase grants 

Plaintiffs’ application for loan modification. 

NOW THEREFORE, Plaintiffs and Chase HEREBY STIPULATE AND AGREE AS 

FOLLOWS:

1. The stay entered by the Court on July 22, 2016 shall remain in force to allow loan 

modification discussions to continue.

2. Within ninety (90) days of the Court’s entry of this stipulation, the parties shall file 

a joint status report indicating (a) the status of Plaintiffs’ loan modification application, and (b) the 

parties’ positions on whether the stay should remain in place or should be lifted and active 

litigation resumed.

3. Chase shall have twenty (20) days from the date of any order lifting the stay to 

answer, move to dismiss, or otherwise respond to the FAC.

Case 3:16-cv-02497-EMC Document 31 Filed 10/20/16 Page 2 of 4
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

3

STIPULATION TO EXTEND STAY OF ACTION PENDING LOAN MODIFICATION REVIEW

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: October 19, 2016

DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP

Joseph E. Addiego III

John D. Freed 

By:/s/ John D. Freed

 John D. Freed 

Attorneys for Defendant

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.

MELLEN LAW FIRM

Eunji Cho

By: /s/ Eunji Cho

 Eunji Cho

One Embarcadero Center, Fifth Floor

San Francisco, CA 94111

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

CERTIFICATION OF CONCURRENCE

Pursuant to L.R. 5-1, I hereby attest that Eunji Cho, counsel for Plaintiffs Wayne and 

Gladys Chan, has provided her concurrence in the electronic filing of the foregoing document 

entitled STIPULATION TO EXTEND STAY OF ACTION PENDING LOAN MODIFICATION 

REVIEW.

/s/ John D. Freed

 John D. Freed

Case 3:16-cv-02497-EMC Document 31 Filed 10/20/16 Page 3 of 4
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

4

STIPULATION TO EXTEND STAY OF ACTION PENDING LOAN MODIFICATION REVIEW

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Presently before the Court is the parties’ Stipulation to Extend Stay of Action Pending 

Loan Modification Review. Good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS the stipulation to permit 

the parties to pursue loan modification as an alternative to litigation. Accordingly, the stay 

imposed on July 22, 2016 remains in place. 

On or before ninety (90) days after the Court’s issuance of this Order, the parties shall 

submit a joint status report advising the Court of (a) the status of Plaintiff’s loan modification 

application, and (b) the parties’ positions on whether the stay should remain in force or active 

litigation resumed. 

Chase shall have twenty (20) days from the date of any order lifting the stay in this case to 

answer, move to dismiss, or otherwise respond to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint.

SO ORDERED

Date: _____________________ _________________________________

Hon. Edward M. Chen

United States District Judge

. The CMC is reset from 11/10/16 to 1/26/17 at 9:30 a.m. 

A joint CMC statement shall be filed by 1/19/17. 

10/20/16

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

AS MODIFIED

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:16-cv-02497-EMC Document 31 Filed 10/20/16 Page 4 of 4