Stolk v. Bank of America NA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 16 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA SHAYLON STOLK, NO. 3:25-cv-05128-JHC Plaintiffs, 19 v. STIPULATED MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM DEADLINE BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC, EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., and TRANS UNION LLC, Defendants.

STIPULATED MOTION FOR 1 RELIEF FROM DEADLINE & ORDER I. STIPULATED MOTION FOR FURTHER RELIEF FROM DEADLINE Plaintiff SHAYLON STOLK (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant, BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. (“BANA”) respectfully request the following modification of the briefing deadlines as to BANA’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 28; Dkt. 29): • Plaintiff shall file any response to BANA’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 28; Dkt. 29) on or before June 27, 2025; • Any reply by BANA shall be filed on or before July 7, 2025.

II. AUTHORITY AND ARGUMENT Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b) sets forth the requirements for obtaining an extension of time in a civil matter. See, e.g., Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd P’ship, 507 U.S. 380, n.4 (1993). Rule 6(b) gives the district court the discretion to extend any specified deadline for “good cause” shown. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1). The decision whether to provide such an extension of time rests within the discretion of the district court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1). Rule 6(b)(1)(A) “gives the court wide discretion to grant a request for additional time that is made prior to the expiration of the period originally prescribed or prior to the expiration of the period as extended by a previous order.” Wright & Miller, § 1165 Extending Time—In General, 4B Fed. Prac. & Proc. Civ. (4th ed.). Absent bad faith by the movant or prejudice to the adverse party, “an application for extension of time under Rule 6(b)(1)(A) normally will be granted.”

Id.; see also Rachel v. Troutt, 820 F.3d 390, 394 (10th Cir. 2016) (“A leading treatise similarly suggests that district courts should normally grant extension requests, made before the deadline, in the absence of bad faith by the requesting party or prejudice to another party.”) (quoting Wright & Miller); Ahanchian v. Xenon Pictures, Inc., 624 F.3d 1253, 1258–59 (9th Cir. 2010).

Here, good cause exists to further extend the deadlines associated with BANA’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 28; Dkt. 29) because Plaintiff recently filed her Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint (Dkt. 39), and BANA’s counsel has now confirmed that BANA does not oppose that STIPULATED MOTION FOR 2 RELIEF FROM DEADLINE & ORDER Motion. Plaintiff awaits a response from the remaining Defendants as to their position on the Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint (Dkt. 39).

There is no prejudice to Defendants for the requested extension, as evidenced by the consent of the moving party, BANA, to further enlarge Plaintiff’s response deadline as to its Motion to Dismiss. Further, BANA has now confirmed that it does not oppose the Motion for Leave to Amend (Dkt. 39). Plaintiff’s further enlargement of the briefing deadline on the Motion to Dismiss will extend the deadline for Plaintiff’s response brief beyond the Motion Calendar date for the Motion for Leave to Amend (Dkt. 39). Given BANA’s non-opposition to the Motion for Leave to Amend (Dkt. 39), the expected filing of an Amended Complaint will moot BANA’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 28; Dkt. 29).

The requested extension will not impact any other deadlines in the case or cause undue delay.

The undersigned counsel certify that the foregoing contains 496 words in compliance with the Local Civil Rules.

IT IS SO STIPULATED this 5th day of June, 2025 at Depoe Bay, Oregon by S//SaraEllen Hutchison SaraEllen Hutchison (WSBA #36137) LAW OFFICE OF SARAELLEN HUTCHISON, PLLC 19 1102 A St Ste 300 PMB 66 Tacoma, WA 98402 20 Telephone: (206) 529-5195 Facsimile: (253) 302-8486 E-mail: [email protected] S//Drew D. Sarrett 23 Drew D. Sarrett (admitted pro hac vice) CONSUMER LITIGATION ASSOCIATES, P.C.

24 626 E. Broad Street, Suite 300 Richmond, Virginia 23219 Phone: (804) 905-9900 26 Facsimile: (757) 930-3662 STIPULATED MOTION FOR 3 RELIEF FROM DEADLINE & ORDER 1 Email: [email protected] 2 Attorneys for Plaintiff S//Nicholas Hesterberg 4 Nicholas Hesterberg, WSBA No. 41970 MILLER NASH LLP 5 605 Sth Avenue S, Suite 900 6 Seattle, WA 98104 Tel: 206.624.8300 7 Fax: 206.340.9599 Email: [email protected] Attorney for Defendant Bank of America, N.A.

10 IT IS SO ORDERED.

1] || Dated this 5th day of June, 2025.

13 Lf ohn. A] : Chur 14 J@HN H. CHUN United States District Judge STIPULATED MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM DEADLINE & ORDER 3:25-cv-05 128-JHC