Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Rose v. Bank of America Corporation

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

October 11, 2013

STEPHENIE ROSE, on behalf herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION, and FIA CARD SERVICES, N.A., Defendants. CAROL DUKE AND JACK POSTER, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.; BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION; AND FIA CARD SERVICES, N.A., Defendants.

LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP Douglas I. Cuthbertson, Pro Hac Vice Jonathan D. Selbin, SBN #170222 Douglas Ian Cuthbertson, , Admitted Pro Hac Vice, New York, New York, Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class.

Douglas J. Campion, SBN #75381 LAW OFFICE OF DOUGLAS J. CAMPION, San Diego, California, Beth E. Terrell, SBN # TERRELL MARSHALL DAUDT & WILLIE PLLC, Seattle, Washington, Daniel M. Hutchinson, SBN #239458 LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP, San Francisco, California, REED SMITH LLP, David S. Reidy, SBN #225904 Marc A. Lackner, (SBN 111753) David S. Reidy, (SBN 225904) Matthew J. Brady, (SBN 254333) San Francisco, California, Abraham J. Colman, (SBN 146933) Y. Yu, (SBN 193316) REED SMITH LLP, Los Angeles, California Attorneys for Defendants.

Joshua B. Swigart, SBN #225557 Robert L. Hyde, SBN #227183 HYDE & SWIGART, San Diego, California, Abbas Kazerounian, SBN #249203 KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, Santa Ana, California, Matthew R. Wilson, Admitted Pro Hac Vice MEYER WILSON CO., LPA, Columbus, Ohio, Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXPEDITING HEARING ON UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

EDWARD J. DAVILA, District Judge.

WHEREAS the parties have reached a proposed Settlement of this class action lawsuit that is intended to resolve all claims in the above-entitled case, as well as all claims in the related case Duke v. Bank of Am., Case No. 5:12-cv-04009 (N.D. Cal.) and claims in the following similar Actions: Ramirez v. Bank of Am., N.A., Case No. 11-cv-02008 (S.D. Cal.); Johnson v. Bank of Am., N.A., Case No. 11-cv-3040 LAB (S.D. Cal.); Makin v. Bank of Am., N.A., Case No. 12-cv-1662 LAB (S.D. Cal.); and Bradshaw v. Bank of Am. Corp., 13-CV-0431 LAB RBB (S.D. Cal.).

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed an Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement ("Motion for Preliminary Approval") (Dkt. No. 59) on September 27, 2013.

WHEREAS, the hearing regarding the Motion for Preliminary Approval is currently scheduled for February 28, 2014.

WHEREAS, if the Court grants preliminary approval, 6, 261, 588 Class Members will receive notice of the terms of the Settlement through First-Class postcards.

WHERAS, on January 26, 2014, the cost to mail First-Class postcards will increase by one cent.

WHEREAS, by expediting the Preliminary Approval Hearing so the mailing occurs prior to the rate increase the Parties can save the Class $62, 615.88 in notice costs.

WHEREAS, the Parties will make themselves available at the Court's convenience for the Preliminary Approval hearing on any weekday, including before or after regular court sessions. The weeks of October 21, October 28, and November 4 are especially convenient for the Parties and would provide the Claims Administrator sufficient time to ensure the mailing can be sent early enough to avoid the rate increase.

I. STIPULATION

The Parties agree that expediting the Preliminary Approval hearing in order to save the Class $62, 615.88 in notice costs is in the best interest of the Class and will make themselves available at the Court's convenience for an expedited hearing.

STIPULATED, DATED AND RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 7th day of October, 2013.

II. [PROPOSED] ORDER

Based on the foregoing stipulation of the parties,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Preliminary Approval hearing currently scheduled for February 28, 2014 shall be expedited and rescheduled to _______, 2013.November 8, 2013, at 9:00 a.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, going forward, the parties must file documents in both case numbers to the extend such documents apply to both case numbers because these cases are related, stand-alone cases and have not been consolidated.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.