vinarshaIIGz,Claw com FAX: (203) 862-9859

November 30, 2010

FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES ONLY

Honorable Peter G. Sheridan, U.S.D.J.

United States District Court-District ofNew Jersey

Martin Luther King, Jr. Federal Building

& Courthouse

50 Walnut Street

Newark, New Jersey 07102

Re: Michael Fourte v. Cowilrywide Home Loans, Inc.

Countrywide Financial Corporation, Countrywide Bank

Case No. 07-CV-1363 (PGS)Our File No. 82978.003

Dear Judge Sheridan:

We represent Defendants in the above-referenced action. With the

consent of Plaintiffs’ counsel, Barry Gainey, Esq., I write on behalf of Plaintiffs andDefendants to advise the Court of the parties’ agreement to continue their good faith

efforts to reach a settlement through further mediation with the Hon. John F. Keefe, Sr.

(Ret.).

As this Court may recall, the parties participated in a day-long mediation

with Judge Keefe on November 19, 2010, Although that mediation did not result insettlement, the parties, with the assistance of Judge Keefe, had productive settlement

discussions and made progress in their negotiations. Indeed, following the November

19 mediation, the parties continued to engage in good faith settlement discussions

through Judge Keefe. As a result of those discussions and at the suggestion of Judge

Keefe, the parties have agreed to participate in a further mediation session with him onDecember 22, 2010. That date is the first one available to Judge Keefe and the parties

between November 29, 2010 and December 24, 2010.

In light of the foregoing, and in order that the parties and their counsel

maY dedicate their time, resources and attention to their continued efforts to achieve a

mutually-agreeable resolution of this action, Plaintiffs and Defendants, with the support

of Judge Keefe, hereby jointly request that this Court temporarily adjourn the remainingbriefing deadlines and current December 20, 2010 hearing date on Plaintiffs’ motion for

)—i 1’ (0
class certification. If a settlement is achieved with Judge Keefe

s ongoing assistance,

such will obviate the need for litigation and resolution of the class certification issue by

this Court and the parties. As such, in order to facilitate their continued good faithsettlement efforts and conserve their and this Court’s resources pending the resolution

of those efforts, Plaintiffs and Defendants jointly propose that this Court order that:

(1) Plaintiffs and Defendants submit a joint report to the

Court on January 4, 2011 stating whether a resolution of

this action has been achieved and, if not, proposingagreed-upon deadlines for the filing of Defendants’ class

certification opposition and Plaintiffs’ class certificationreply submissions;

(2) the December 6, 2010 deadline for Defendants’ class

certification opposition submissions is adjourned

pending further order of the Court;

(3) the December 17, 2010 deadline for Plaintiffs” class

certification reply submissions is adjourned pendingfurther order of the Court; and

(4) the December 20, 2010 hearing on Plaintiffs’ class

certification motion is adjourned pending further orderof the Court.

Plaintiffs and Defendants respectfully submit that there is good cause for

the requested adjournments to promote settlement. Ehrheart v. Verizon Wireless, 609

F.3d 590 (3rd Cir. 2010) (recognizing the strong judicial policy favoring settlements of

class action lawsuits). In addition, the requested adjournments are also consistent with

the spirit of L. Civ. R. 301.1 and Fed. R, Civ. P. 1 (Rules “should be construed to secure

the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action”).

Thank your for your consideration.

Respectfully yours,

/ >2

/

( V

William I. Marshall. Jr. //

WTM:kad

cc: Barry Gaincv, Esq.