Preview
16CV300096
Santa Clara — Civil
System System
Electronically Filed
by Superior Court of CA,
County of Santa Clara,
on 7/30/2021 1:08 PM
Reviewed By: System System
Case #16CV300096
Envelope: 6963030
Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575) Gregory K. Sabo (SBN 169760)
fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com gsabo@cgdrlaw.com
Raeon R. Roulston (SBN 255622) Chelsea Lee Zwart (SBN 305951)
raeon.roulston@sjconsumerlaw.com czwart@cgdrlaw.com
Matthew C. Salmonsen (SBN 302854) CHAPMAN GLUCKSMAN DEAN & ROEB
matthew.salmonsen@sjconsumerlaw.com 11900 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 800
CONSUMER LAW CENTER, INC. Los Angeles, California 90064-0704
1435 Koll Circle, Suite 104 Telephone: (310) 207-7722
10 San Jose, California 95112-4610 Facsimile: (310) 207-6550
Telephone Number: (408) 294-6100
ll Facsimile Number: (408) 294-6190 Attorneys for Cross-Defendant
VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC
12
Attorneys for Cross-Complainant
13 MARIA ANTONIA CANUL
14 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
15
16 VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, Case No. 16CV300096
(Unlimited Civil Case)
17 Plaintiff,
v. Assigned for All Purposes to
18
The Honorable Patricia M. Lucas
MARIA CANUL,
19
Defendant.
20
MARIA ANTONIA CANUL, on behalf of
21 herself and all others similarly situated, JOINT FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE STATEMENT
22 Cross-Complainant,
Hearing Date: August 4, 2021
23 a Hearing Time: 2:30 p.m.
24 Hearing Dept.: 3
VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, a New Hearing Location: CourtCall
Jersey limited liability company; VELOCITY
25
PORTFOLIO GROUP, INC., a Delaware
26 corporation, and ROES 1 through 10,
inclusive,
27
Cross-Defendants.
28
-1-
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT Case No. 16CV300096
1. INTRODUCTION
Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL, and Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant,
VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, hereby submit this Joint Case Management Statement for the
August 4, 2021 Further Case Management Conference.
2. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This case was deemed complex on January 19, 2021. On February 17, 2021, the parties attended
the initial Case Management Conference. On February 26, 2021, the Court heard and granted Cross-
Complainant’s motion to compel further discovery responses from Cross-Defendant.
10
On January 29, 2021, the Cross-Complaint was amended to name Roe 1| as Cross-Defendant,
ll
VELOCITY PORTFOLIO GROUP, INC. (“VPGI”), which Cross-Defendant was served on March 13,
12
13 2021. VPGI has yet to make a formal appearance in this case, and its responsive pleading was due by
14 June 15, 2021 by agreement of the parties.
15 3. DISCOVERY TO DATE
16
a. Cross-Complainant’s Statement
17
The Court granted Cross-Complainant’s motion to compel on February 26, 2021. Pursuant to
18
19 that Order, Cross-Defendant served supplemental discovery responses on or about March 19, 2021, and
20 again on July 16, 2021. While Cross-Defendant’s responses are largely adequate, Cross-Defendant’s
21 document production remains incomplete, as addressed by Cross-Complainant’s counsel in an email
22
dated July 22, 2021. As of this Statement, Cross-Defendant has not indicated whether or not it will
23
correct the deficiencies identified in the July 22, 2021 email.
24
25 There also remains outstanding subpoenas to third parties, but Cross-Complainant is engaged in
26 the meet and confer process with these third parties.
27 Once the Cross-Complaint is amended and VPGI makes a formal appearance in this case, Cross-
28
-2-
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT Case No. 16CV300096
Complainant will likely serve discovery on VPGI.
b. Cross-Defendants’ Statement
Cross-Defendant’s counsel will meet and confer with Cross-Complainant’s counsel regarding
Cross-Complainant’s contention that Cross-Defendant’s document production is incomplete.
4, OTHER ISSUES
a. Cross-Complainant’s Statement
Now that the Roe 1 Cross-Defendant has been named, Cross-Complainant anticipates amending
the Cross-Complaint in this matter. Counsel for Cross-Complainant is currently seeking a stipulation to
10
amend but, failing that, will file a noticed motion.
ll
As the definition of the putative class will not be affected by Cross-Complainant’s amendment,
12
13 Cross-Complainant requests a hearing date for both her Motion to Amend Cross-Complainant and
14 Motion for Class Certification. If the Motion to Amend Cross-Complaint becomes unnecessary due to
15 stipulation, Cross-Complainant will inform the Complex Coordinator.
16
Additionally, there is the matter of VPGI’s default. Cross-Complainant prefers to file the
17
contemplated amended Cross-Complaint prior to taking VPGI’s default.
18
19 b. Cross-Defendants’ Statement
20 Cross-Defendant cannot comment on the assertion that the amended complaint will not affect
21 the definition of the putative class, as represented by Cross-Complaint herein. Cross-Defendant has not
22
yet seen the proposed amended complaint and is unable to stipulate to the amendment.
23
Further, counsel for Cross-Defendant is still in the process of substituting out of this matter. It is
24
25 anticipated that the substitution will be effectuated within the next two weeks, given the ongoing meet
26 and confer discussions related to Cross-Defendant’s production of documents.
27 In light of the foregoing, a brief 30-day continuance of the CMC is requested in order to afford
28
-3-
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT Case No. 16CV300096
newly appointed counsel to appear and to evaluate the proposed amendment.
CONSUMER LAW CENTER, INC.
Dated: July 30, 2021 By: /s/ Matthew C. Salmonsen
OF red W. Schwinn (SBN 225575)
ORacon R. Roulston (SBN 255622)
Matthew C. Salmonsen (SBN 302854)
Attorneys for Cross-Complainant
MARIA ANTONIA CANUL
CHAPMAN GLUCKSMAN DEAN & ROEB
10
ll Dated: July 30, 2021 By:
OGregory (0 (SBN 169760)
12
E] Chelsea Lee Zwart (SBN 305951)
13
Attorneys for Cross-Defendant
14 VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4-
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT Case No. 16CV300096
Preview
16CV300096 Santa Clara — Civil System System Electronically Filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 7/30/2021 1:08 PM Reviewed By: System System Case #16CV300096 Envelope: 6963030 Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575) Gregory K. Sabo (SBN 169760) fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com gsabo@cgdrlaw.com Raeon R. Roulston (SBN 255622) Chelsea Lee Zwart (SBN 305951) raeon.roulston@sjconsumerlaw.com czwart@cgdrlaw.com Matthew C. Salmonsen (SBN 302854) CHAPMAN GLUCKSMAN DEAN & ROEB matthew.salmonsen@sjconsumerlaw.com 11900 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 800 CONSUMER LAW CENTER, INC. Los Angeles, California 90064-0704 1435 Koll Circle, Suite 104 Telephone: (310) 207-7722 10 San Jose, California 95112-4610 Facsimile: (310) 207-6550 Telephone Number: (408) 294-6100 ll Facsimile Number: (408) 294-6190 Attorneys for Cross-Defendant VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC 12 Attorneys for Cross-Complainant 13 MARIA ANTONIA CANUL 14 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 15 16 VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, Case No. 16CV300096 (Unlimited Civil Case) 17 Plaintiff, v. Assigned for All Purposes to 18 The Honorable Patricia M. Lucas MARIA CANUL, 19 Defendant. 20 MARIA ANTONIA CANUL, on behalf of 21 herself and all others similarly situated, JOINT FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT 22 Cross-Complainant, Hearing Date: August 4, 2021 23 a Hearing Time: 2:30 p.m. 24 Hearing Dept.: 3 VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, a New Hearing Location: CourtCall Jersey limited liability company; VELOCITY 25 PORTFOLIO GROUP, INC., a Delaware 26 corporation, and ROES 1 through 10, inclusive, 27 Cross-Defendants. 28 -1- JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT Case No. 16CV300096 1. INTRODUCTION Defendant/Cross-Complainant, MARIA ANTONIA CANUL, and Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, hereby submit this Joint Case Management Statement for the August 4, 2021 Further Case Management Conference. 2. RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY This case was deemed complex on January 19, 2021. On February 17, 2021, the parties attended the initial Case Management Conference. On February 26, 2021, the Court heard and granted Cross- Complainant’s motion to compel further discovery responses from Cross-Defendant. 10 On January 29, 2021, the Cross-Complaint was amended to name Roe 1| as Cross-Defendant, ll VELOCITY PORTFOLIO GROUP, INC. (“VPGI”), which Cross-Defendant was served on March 13, 12 13 2021. VPGI has yet to make a formal appearance in this case, and its responsive pleading was due by 14 June 15, 2021 by agreement of the parties. 15 3. DISCOVERY TO DATE 16 a. Cross-Complainant’s Statement 17 The Court granted Cross-Complainant’s motion to compel on February 26, 2021. Pursuant to 18 19 that Order, Cross-Defendant served supplemental discovery responses on or about March 19, 2021, and 20 again on July 16, 2021. While Cross-Defendant’s responses are largely adequate, Cross-Defendant’s 21 document production remains incomplete, as addressed by Cross-Complainant’s counsel in an email 22 dated July 22, 2021. As of this Statement, Cross-Defendant has not indicated whether or not it will 23 correct the deficiencies identified in the July 22, 2021 email. 24 25 There also remains outstanding subpoenas to third parties, but Cross-Complainant is engaged in 26 the meet and confer process with these third parties. 27 Once the Cross-Complaint is amended and VPGI makes a formal appearance in this case, Cross- 28 -2- JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT Case No. 16CV300096 Complainant will likely serve discovery on VPGI. b. Cross-Defendants’ Statement Cross-Defendant’s counsel will meet and confer with Cross-Complainant’s counsel regarding Cross-Complainant’s contention that Cross-Defendant’s document production is incomplete. 4, OTHER ISSUES a. Cross-Complainant’s Statement Now that the Roe 1 Cross-Defendant has been named, Cross-Complainant anticipates amending the Cross-Complaint in this matter. Counsel for Cross-Complainant is currently seeking a stipulation to 10 amend but, failing that, will file a noticed motion. ll As the definition of the putative class will not be affected by Cross-Complainant’s amendment, 12 13 Cross-Complainant requests a hearing date for both her Motion to Amend Cross-Complainant and 14 Motion for Class Certification. If the Motion to Amend Cross-Complaint becomes unnecessary due to 15 stipulation, Cross-Complainant will inform the Complex Coordinator. 16 Additionally, there is the matter of VPGI’s default. Cross-Complainant prefers to file the 17 contemplated amended Cross-Complaint prior to taking VPGI’s default. 18 19 b. Cross-Defendants’ Statement 20 Cross-Defendant cannot comment on the assertion that the amended complaint will not affect 21 the definition of the putative class, as represented by Cross-Complaint herein. Cross-Defendant has not 22 yet seen the proposed amended complaint and is unable to stipulate to the amendment. 23 Further, counsel for Cross-Defendant is still in the process of substituting out of this matter. It is 24 25 anticipated that the substitution will be effectuated within the next two weeks, given the ongoing meet 26 and confer discussions related to Cross-Defendant’s production of documents. 27 In light of the foregoing, a brief 30-day continuance of the CMC is requested in order to afford 28 -3- JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT Case No. 16CV300096 newly appointed counsel to appear and to evaluate the proposed amendment. CONSUMER LAW CENTER, INC. Dated: July 30, 2021 By: /s/ Matthew C. Salmonsen OF red W. Schwinn (SBN 225575) ORacon R. Roulston (SBN 255622) Matthew C. Salmonsen (SBN 302854) Attorneys for Cross-Complainant MARIA ANTONIA CANUL CHAPMAN GLUCKSMAN DEAN & ROEB 10 ll Dated: July 30, 2021 By: OGregory (0 (SBN 169760) 12 E] Chelsea Lee Zwart (SBN 305951) 13 Attorneys for Cross-Defendant 14 VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -4- JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT Case No. 16CV300096