Shaw

Shaw v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.

Good Law
49 F. Supp. 3d 702·2014 WL 4824720·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143330
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaSeptember 29, 2014Case No. 13-CV-1295 JLS (BLM)California3,446 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sammartino, J.

ORDER: (1) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT CITIMORTGAGE, INC.’S MOTION TO DISMISS; (2) GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANT WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.’S MOTION TO DISMISS; AND (3) DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS CITIMORTGAGE, INC. AND WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.’S MOTION TO MAINTAIN THE STAY OF DISCOVERY

(ECF Nos. 58, 60, 61)

Presently before the Court are Defendant CitiMortgage, Inc.’s (“CitiMortgage”) Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint or, in the Alternative, to Dismiss *704 and/or Strike Class Allegations (“MTD”) (ECF No. 58); Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.’s (“Wells Fargo”) Motion to Dismiss and Partial Joinder in CitiMort-gage’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint or, in the Alternative, to Strike Class Allegations (ECF No. 60); and CitiMortgage and Wells Fargo’s (collectively, “Furnishers”) Motion to Maintain the Stay of Discovery Pending Resolution of Their Motions to Dismiss and Joinder of Experian Information Solutions, Inc. (ECF No. 61). Also before the Court are Plaintiffs John T. Shaw (“Shaw”), Kenneth Coke (“Coke”), and Raymond Rydman’s (“Rydman,” and, collectively, “Plaintiffs”) Combined Response to Furnishers’ MTDs (ECF No.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.