Court filing
MOTION Request for Judicial Notice re: pldg. ( 33 in MDL No. 2954) - Filed by Kathleen… — Agent Fee Litigation (Dkt. 34)
Summary
A Request for Judicial Notice filed June 24, 2020 as Document 34 before the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in In re: Wells Fargo Paycheck Protection Program Litigation, MDL No. 2954. It is submitted for plaintiff Karen's Custom Grooming LLC in support of its opposition to DNM Contracting, Inc.'s motion to transfer actions to the Southern District of Texas under 28 U.S.C. §1407. The request asks the panel, under Rule 201 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, to notice four documents filed in the Southern and Northern Districts of California: joint motions to extend time filed June 16, 2020 and June 22, 2020 in Karen's Custom Grooming LLC v. Wells Fargo & Company, Case No. 3:20-cv-00956-LAB-BGS, and two 2015 venue-transfer filings in Maldonado v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Case No. 3:15-cv-02333-CRB. The filing is three pages.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Full text
Case MDL No. 2954 Document 34 Filed 06/24/20 Page 1 of 3
BEFORE THE
UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL ON
MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION
IN RE: WELLS FARGO PAYCHECK MDL No. 2954
PROTECTION PROGRAM LITIGATION
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF KAREN’S
CUSTOM GROOMING LLC’S OPPOSITION TO DNM CONTRACTING, INC.’S
MOTION FOR TRANSFER OF ACTIONS TO THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §1407 FOR COORDINATED OR CONSOLIDATED
PRETRIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pursuant to Federal Rule 201 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, the undersigned counsel of
record for Plaintiff Karen’s Custom Grooming LLC (“KCG”), respectfully submits this request
for judicial notice in support of KCG’s opposition to DNM Contracting, Inc.’s motion for transfer
of actions to the Southern District of Texas pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1407 for coordinated or
consolidated pretrial proceedings (the “DNM Motion”).
Plaintiff KCG respectfully requests the court take judicial notice of the following
document(s) in the following files of the Southern District of California and in the Northern
District of California:
1. Joint Motion to Extend Time for Defendants to Respond to Complaint, filed
June 16, 2020 in Karen’s Custom Grooming LLC v. Wells Fargo &
Company, et al., Case No. 3:20-cv-00956-LAB-BGS (S.D. Cal.) (the “KCG
Action”).
2. Joint Motion to Extend Time for Defendants to Respond to Complaint, filed
June 22, 2020 in the KCG Action.
3. Stipulation to Transfer Venue Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1404(a); Order, filed
Case MDL No. 2954 Document 34 Filed 06/24/20 Page 2 of 3
on or about July 21, 2015 in Maldonado v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Case
No. 3:15-cv-02333-CRB (N. D. Cal.) (the “Maldonado Action”).
4. Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.’s Notice of Motion and Motion to
Transfer Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1404(a), filed on or about July 2, 2015 in
the Maldonado Action.
Pursuant to Rule 201, the Federal Rules of Evidence permit the Court to consider 'facts that
may be judicially noticed," that is, facts that are either "generally known within the trial court’s
territorial jurisdiction," or which "can be accurately and readily determined from sources whose
accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” Fed. R. Evid. 201(b)(1) & (2). This rule is founded
on the assumption that when certain facts are outside of the realm of reasonable controversy, it is
not necessary to establish such facts by testimony and through the introduction of physical
evidence.
The documents subject to Plaintiff’s request for judicial notice, Exhibits 1 – 4, identified
above, and attached to the concurrently filed Declaration of Kathleen A. Herkenhoff in support of
the opposition to the DNM Motion, are documents on file with the Southern District of California
and the Northern District of California, respectively, in the actions entitled: Karen’s Custom
Grooming LLC v. Wells Fargo & Company, et al., Case No. 3:20-cv-00956-LAB-BGS (S.D. Cal.);
and Maldonado v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Case No. 3:15-cv-02333-CRB (N.D. Cal.) (the
“Maldonado Action”). Request for judicial notice is appropriate since the documents are public
records and their accuracy cannot be reasonably questioned. See Anderson v. Louden, LLC, No.
C 13-04159 WHA, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172905 at *11-12 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 6, 2013).
2
Case MDL No. 2954 Document 34 Filed 06/24/20 Page 3 of 3
Therefore, it is appropriate for this Court to take notice of the pleadings filed in the KCG
Action by Plaintiff and Defendants, and pleadings filed by Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. in
the Maldonado Action, which was originally pending in the Northern District of California, but
which Defendant Wells Fargo Bank., N.A. moved (and later stipulated) to transfer to the Southern
District of California.
Respectfully submitted,
Dated: June 24, 2020 HAEGGQUIST & ECK, LLP
ALREEN HAEGGQUIST
KATHLEEN A. HERKENHOFF
IAN PIKE
By: s/ Kathleen A. Herkenhoff
KATHLEEN A. HERKENHOFF
225 Broadway, Suite 2050
San Diego, California 92101
Telephone: (619) 342-8000
Facsimile: (619) 342-7878
alreenh@haelaw.com
kathleenh@haelaw.com
ianp@haelaw.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff Karen’s Custom Grooming
LLC
3
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.jpml.1161957.34.0.pdf
- Size
- 172,708 bytes
- SHA-256
- 041eee8bb3c1b2c715aeebc44a8b9f0ec60a8874354bb59b0b479904cf0dead8
- Original
- No public link identified.