MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
TERRENCE F. MCVERRY, District Judge.
Pending before the Court are nearly duplicative motions to stay the above-captioned proceedings and/or a parallel state court proceeding filed at two separate civil action numbers: the MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT AND/OR STAY PROCEEDINGS, filed by Defendant Environmental Contracting Systems Inc., (13-mc-147, ECF No. 8); PLAINTIFFS CROSS-MOTION FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER STAYING COURT PROCEEDINGS AND REQUEST FOR AN EXPEDITED HEARING ON SUCH CROSS-MOTION (13-mc-147; ECF No. 10); the MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT AND/OR TO STAY PROCEEDINGS (13-mc-149; ECF No. 10) filed by Defendants John H. Miller and Linda E. Miller; and the PLAINTIFF'S CROSS-MOTION FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER STAYING STATE COURT PROCEEDINGS AND REQUEST FOR AN EXPEDITED HEARING ON SUCH CROSS-MOTION (13-mc-149; ECF No.13). The motions have been fully briefed.
By Memorandum Order dated May 22, 2013, the Court granted the request for an expedited hearing on whether an Order staying the state court proceedings should be entered. The Court heard argument on that limited issue on Friday, May 24, 2013. Accordingly, that aspect of the matters is ripe for disposition.
Defendant Greensburg Environmental Contracting Systems Inc. is a Pennsylvania corporation with a last known principal place of business in Greensburg, PA. John H. Miller and Lisa E. Miller (husband and wife) were officers of that corporation.
Greensburg Environmental obtained a loan in an original principal amount of $500, 000.00 from National City Bank of Pennsylvania on September 6, 2005. At that time, the Millers also allegedly guaranteed any and all indebtedness of Greensburg Environmental to National City Bank of Pennsylvania, pursuant to a "Commercial Guaranty." Under the Guaranty, the Millers apparently jointly and severally agreed to unconditionally guarantee all obligations of Greensburg Environmental to National City Bank of Pennsylvania, its successors and assigns.
Several modifications to the original Note followed. The original Note was first modified on May 2, 2007 between Greensburg Environmental and National City Bank, increasing the principal amount to $750, 000.00. In September 2009, the loan and all related collateral were assigned by National City Bank to First Niagara Funding Inc. On March 11, 201, Greensburg Environmental next executed and delivered to First Niagara a "Demand Grid Note" in the principal amount of $1, 000, 000.00, and the parties agreed to increase the amount of the loan under the original note. Pursuant to a series of "Assignment and Assumption Agreements, " First Niagara then assigned all of its rights in the Note to First Niagara Funding, Inc. on March 31, 2011, which ultimately assigned all of its right in the Note to First Niagara Bank, N.A. (the "Plaintiff") on March 22, 2013.
Most importantly, the Note and Guaranty both contain a section entitled "Confession of Judgment." The provision in the Note authorizes and empowers Plaintiff to confess or enter judgment against Greensburg Environmental for "all sums due that may become due under the Note, with costs of suit, without stay of execution and with an amount equal to ten percent (10%) of the amount of such judgment, for not less than $1, 000.00 for attorneys' collection fees." ECF No. 1-4 at 5, ¶ 14 (13-mc-147). The provision in the Guaranty authorizes and empowers Plaintiff to confess or to enter judgment against the Millers for "the entire principal balance of th[e] Guaranty and all accrued interest late charges and any and all amounts expended or advance[d] by lender relating to any of the collateral securing the Indebtedness, together with costs of suit, and attorneys' commission of ten percent (10%) of the unpaid principal balance and accrued interest." ECF No. 1 at 4, ¶ 16 (13-mc-149).
By letter dated January 31, 2013, Plaintiff made a demand on Greensburg Environmental and the Millers for the full payment and performance of the Note. Allegedly, Greensburg Environmental and/or the Millers failed to pay the Note in full or otherwise remedy the default under the Loan documents.
Accordingly, Plaintiff, First Niagara Bank, N.A. ("First Niagara"), filed Verified Complaints in Confession of Judgment on April 3, 2012 against Greensburg Environmental Contracting Systems, Inc. at civil action number 13-mc-147 and against John H. Miller and Linda E. Miller (both residents of Utah) at civil action number 13-mc-149). Plaintiff avers that Greensburg Environmental and/or the Millers are currently indebted to First Niagara and seeks the aggregate principal amount of $705, 434.53 with interest thereon at the Prime Rate through March 6, 2013 in the amount of $6, 962.91, plus late charges of $323.08 and attorneys' fees of $70, 643.45 (calculated at 10% of the outstanding principal amount), for a total of $784, 363.97, together with interest thereon from March 6, 2013 to the date of Judgment at a per diem rate of $53.78. Plaintiff also seeks post-judgment interest and the costs of collection (the "Total Indebtedness"). On April 3, the Clerk of Court filed an Entry of Judgment By Confession and Assessment of Damages in favor of Plaintiff and against Greensburg Environmental for the Total Indebtedness stated in the Complaint; an identical entry of judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against the Millers was filed the following day. Plaintiff thereafter domesticated the Judgment in the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania on April 9, 2013 pursuant to Rule 3002 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure and the Pennsylvania Uniform Enforcement of Foreign Judgments Act, 42 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 4306.
Following entry of the state court judgment, Counsel for Greensburg Environmental and the Millers filed a Motion for Relief of Judgment on May 2, 2013 at both federal civil action numbers. In said motion, Counsel notes that the defendants have filed a Petition seeking relief from the judgment with the Court of Common Pleas of Westmoreland County and requests that this Court grant relief from the judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b), or alternatively stay the federal court actions pending a determination by the state court.
Plaintiff opposes that filing in its entirety on two grounds. First, Plaintiff argues that Defendants have failed to set forth sufficient bases to strike or open the judgment. Second, Plaintiff submits that this Court is the proper forum to adjudicate any issues regarding the validity of the judgment, and therefore, Defendants' motion to stay should be denied.
Plaintiff also filed a cross-motion on May 17, 2013 in which it moves for the Court to enter an order staying the state court proceeding, relying primarily on the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651 and various interpretations that the statute provides district courts with the authority to stay state court actions to protect and/or effectuate final judgments. ECF No. 14 at 2 (citing Baker v. Gotz, 415 F.Supp. 1243, 1246 (D. Del. 1976), aff'd, 546 F.2d 415 (3d Cir. 1976)). Plaintiff also requested that the Court hold an expedited hearing on the motion(s) to stay because Defendants' Counsel intends to present the State Court Petition to the motions judge in Westmoreland County on May 31, 2013, and will seek a rule to show cause why such petition should not be granted. This Court granted the request for a hearing.
On May 23, 2013, Defendants filed a response in opposition the cross-motion for entry of a stay of the state court proceedings. Defendants submit that the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure ...