The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable Otis D. Wright II, United States District Judge
Raymond Neal Not Present n/a Deputy Clerk Court Reporter Tape No.
Proceedings (In Chambers): ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS HOMECOMINGS FINANCIAL, LLC AND GMAC MORTGAGE, LLC'S MOTION TO DISMISS THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT [DOCKET NO. 36.]
The matter is before the Court on Defendants Homecomings Financial, LLC ("Homecomings") and GMAC Mortgage, LLC's ("GMAC") (collectively, "Defendants") Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint ("FAC") pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Having considered the matter, the Court deems it appropriate for decision without oral argument pursuant to Rule 78 and Local Rule 7-15, GRANTS Defendants' motion, and dismisses the FAC with leave to amend.
Plaintiffs Ronald and Sonia Hawkins ("Plaintiffs") commenced this action on August 31, 2009 against Homecomings, GMAC, and First Mortgage Solutions.*fn1 The initial complaint alleged nine causes of action: (1) Violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ("RESPA"); (2) Violation of the Truth-In-Lending Act ("TILA"); (3) Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practice Act ("FDCPA"); (4) violation of the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collections Practices Act, Cal. Civ. Code et seq.; (5) Negligent Misrepresentation; (6) Fraud; (7) Rescission; (8) Quasi Contract; and (9) Determination of Validity of Lien. (Docket No. 1.)
In November 2009, Defendants filed a Rule 12(b)(6) motion. (Docket No. 14.) The Court granted the motion with leave to amend. However, the FDCPA claim was dismissed with prejudice. (Docket No. 31.)
On February 26, 2010, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. (Docket No. 32.) On March 1, 2010, the document was stricken due to Plaintiffs' failure to comply with G.O. 08-02. (Docket No. 34.)
On March 9, 2010, Plaintiffs filed the FAC, the operative complaint in this action. (Docket No. 35.) For the reasons stated below, the Court dismisses Plaintiffs' federal causes of action and declines to exercise subject matter jurisdiction over the state claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c).
This action concerns a loan secured by real property. Plaintiffs aver that they are the owners of real property in Lake Elsinore, California. (FAC ¶ 1.) On September 21, 2007, Plaintiffs obtained a loan from Defendant Homecomings. (Id. at ¶ 14.) After funding the loan, Homecomings allegedly became the loan servicer. (Id. at ¶ 45.) Thereafter, "servicing responsibilities were transferred to GMAC and GMAC became and currently is the servicer of the [l]oan." (Id.) During and after the issuance of the loan, Defendants allegedly violated federal and state laws in various ways by, inter alia, failing to adequately respond to Qualified Written Requests ("QWR"); failing to provide adequate disclosures relating to the loan; and misrepresenting important terms of the loan.
The FAC alleges the same causes of actions as the original complaint, except for the FDCPA claim, which was dismissed with prejudice. (Docket No. 31.)