seek an Ex Parte Order Vacating the Automatic Stay. (Murphy Cert. Ex. G at V 5) 7 . The record is somewhat unclear as to how many payments Plaintiffs missed. Washington Mutual’s motion to vacate the stay asserts that Plaintiffs failed to make payments for February, March, and April, 2005. (Murphy Cert. Ex. L) However, the order resolving the motion states that "Debtor is presently delinquent in post-petition payments for the months of April 2005 through May 2005.” (Id.Ex. M) Perhaps Plaintiffs made two payments between the motion and the order, but the Court cannot make that conclusion based on the documents bef Court of Appeals to directly consider the issue, and the other courts that have made similar rulings. See Vega v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., 564 F.3d 1256, 1268 n. 12 (11th Cir. 2009) (<HOLDING>); but see Falcon v. Philips Elecs. N. Am.
holding that tolling applies to a subsequent class action when class certification was granted in a prior case holding that putative class members are not parties to an action prior to class certification holding that the court retained cafa jurisdiction even though class certification was denied holding that a district of columbia consumer protection statute that authorized representative actions and did not reference class action requirements or mandate class certification was a separate and distinct procedural vehicle from a class action and thus did not constitute a class action under cafa holding that cafa jurisdiction survived denial of class certification