The opinion of the court was delivered by: Susan Illston United States District Judge
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND ROPOSED]ORDER TO EXTEND PLFF'S TIME TO 1079087.1 RESPOND TO DEFT'S MOT. TO COMPEL ARBITRATION CASE NO. 3:12-CV-06030-SI STIP. [P
Plaintiff Madeline Martin ("Plaintiff") and defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo"), through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate as follows: 3 WHEREAS, on November 28, 2012, Plaintiff filed a Class Action Complaint (Dkt. No. 1); 5
WHEREAS, in response to Wells Fargo's request that Plaintiff provide Wells Fargo with 6 her identifying information to locate her records, Plaintiff voluntarily provided her Wells Fargo 7 account number and telephone number to Wells Fargo as a courtesy on December 4, 2012; 8 WHEREAS, on December 21, 2012, Plaintiff agreed to extend Wells Fargo's deadline to 9 answer or otherwise respond to the Class Action Complaint from December 26, 2012 until 10 January 18, 2013 (Dkt. No. 7); 11
WHEREAS , on January 18, 2013, Wells Fargo filed a motion to stay and dismiss this 12 action and compel Plaintiff to arbitrate her claims as an individual (Dkt. No. 19) ("Motion to 13 Compel Arbitration"); 14 WHEREAS, Wells Fargo's Motion to Compel Arbitration is based on records it gathered 15 using the telephone number that Plaintiff disclosed to it on December 4, 2012 and states, 16 specifically, that calls to the number were made in connection with a business account maintained 17 by Plaintiff containing an arbitration clause; 18 WHEREAS, on January 25, 2013, by letter, Plaintiff sought limited discovery from Wells Fargo in order to submit appropriate evidence to oppose Wells Fargo's motion to compel 20 arbitration and identified a cellular telephone number to which Plaintiff alleges that Wells Fargo 21 made automated calls; 22
WHEREAS, in an email dated January 30, 2013, Plaintiff clarified that the telephone number disclosed in the December 4, 2012 email was, in fact, not the cellular number at which 24 she allegedly received automated telephone calls, but was instead a landline number to which 25 Wells Fargo made automated calls; and 26
WHEREAS, on January 30, 2013, Wells Fargo advised Plaintiff that it drafted the Motion
27 to Compel Arbitration on the assumption that the number at issue was the number she had 28 disclosed in the December 4, 2012 email. S .
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, between Plaintiff,
2 by their undersigned counsel, and Wells Fargo, by their undersigned counsel, that: 3
(1) Wells Fargo's Motion to Compel Arbitration shall be and hereby is withdrawn
(2) Wells Fargo may file an answer, amended motion to compel arbitration, or other
6 response to the Class Action Complaint within 30 days of the Court's ruling ...