Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Buy This Entire Record For
Jimenez v. Bank of America Home Loans Servicing Lp
February 2, 2012
BANK OF AMERICA HOME LOANS SERVICING LP, ET AL.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable Margaret M. Morrow
Present: The Honorable MARGARET M. MORROW
Deputy Clerk Court Reporter
Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants:
Proceedings: Order to Show Cause Why Action Should Not Be Dismissed For Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction
On November 15, 2011, plaintiff Silvia Jimenez ("Jimenez") filed this action against defendant Bank of America Home Loans Servicing LP ("BOA"), Bank of New York Mellon ("BNYM"), Recontrust ("Recon"), Maria Zendejas ("Zendejas"), and Does 1-10 inclusive.*fn1 Plaintiff does not allege the citizenship of any party and asserts no specific basis for the court's jurisdiction.*fn2
On or about July 7, 2007, Jimenez went to BOA and acquired the subject property pursuant to a Deed of Trust.*fn3 Jimenez alleges that defendants never fully disclosed the terms of the mortgage loan and engaged in unfair and deceptive lending practices.*fn4 Defendants pushed teaser rates at Jimenez, while selling their loans to third parties and often earning increased profits for riskier loans.*fn5
On or about April 25, 2011, Recon served Jimenez with a Notice of
Default and Election to sell under the Deed of Trust.*fn6
Jimenez asked Recon to comply with all relevant Federal
Mortgage Assistance programs and California Mortgage Assistance
programs, but a Notice of Sale was set for September 2,
2011.*fn7 Prior to the foreclosure sale, Jimenez
alleges that she made improvements on subject property that exceed
$50,000 in value.*fn8 The cover sheet of her complaint
lists nine causes action for intentional fraud, breach of fiduciary
duty, negligence, quiet title, cancellation of deed, "injunctive
relief (2 counts)," cancellation of trustee's deed, declaratory
relief, and recission.*fn9 The of the complaint,
however, pleads only three causes of action for (1) cancellation of
the trustee's upon sale, (2) cancellation of the trustee sale, and (3)
violation of the Unfair Competition Law ("UCL"), Cal. Bus. & Prof.
Code § 17200 et seq.*fn10
A. Legal Standard Governing Assertion of Federal Jurisdiction
As the party invoking federal jurisdiction in this case, plaintiff has the burden of establishing the existence of subject matter jurisdiction. See Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994); In re Ford Motor Co., 264 F.3d 952, 957 (9th Cir. 2001); Thompson v. McCombe, 99 F.3d 352, 353 (9th Cir. 1996). This burden, at the pleading stage, can be met by alleging sufficient facts to show that there is a proper basis for jurisdiction. FED.R.CIV.PROC. 8(a)(1) (a complaint "shall contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the court's jurisdiction depends"); see McNutt v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 298 U.S. 178, 189 (1936) ("The prerequisites to the exercise of jurisdiction are specifically defined and the plain import of the statute is that the District Court is vested with authority to inquire at any time ...
Buy This Entire Record For