Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Marley v. JP Morgan Chase Bank

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

August 27, 2013

DIANA M. MARLEY, Plaintiff,
v.
JP MORGAN CHASE BANK; CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE COMPANY, Defendants.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS [Dkt. No. 7.]

DEAN D. PREGERSON, District Judge.

Presently before the court is Defendants JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. ("JPMorgan") and California Reconveyance Company ("CRC")'s Motion to Dismiss. Having considered the parties' submissions, [1] the court adopts the following order.

I. Background

Plaintiff Diana Marley is a California resident. (Compl. ¶ 12.) Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank ("JPMorgan") is a California corporation and a national banking association, which claims to be the owner and/or creditor of Plaintiff's mortgage and promissory note. (Id. ¶ 13.) Defendant California Reconveyance Company("CRC") is a California corporation, which is alleged to be a trustee of Plaintiff's deed of trust. (Id. ¶ 14.)

Plaintiff contends she owns 2049 Carfax Avenue, Long Beach, CA 90815[2] ("Subject Property"). (Id. ¶ 2.) On December 8, 2006, Plaintiff "conducted a consumer transaction, including but not limited to a Note and Deed of Trust, " with Washington Mutual Bank, F.A. listed as the lender. (Id. ¶ 20; See Exh. A, Deed of Trust.) That Deed of Trust indicates that "Borrower owes Lender Five hundred sixty thousand and 00/100 ($560, 000) plus interest." (Compl., Exh. A, at (E).) In March 2007, Plaintiff's "consumer transaction" was sold to Washington Mutual Asset Corporation. (Id. ¶ 21.) On March 7, 2007, it was sold into the secondary market through securitization to WMALT 2007-OA3. (Id. ¶ 21.) Washington Mutual collapsed and was purchased by JPMorgan. (Id. ¶ 23). However, Plaintiff alleges that JPMorgan's purchase did not include the consumer account of the Plaintiff. (Id. ¶ 23.)

Plaintiff seeks to quiet title to the Subject Property. Throughout her Complaint she asserts that she has not defaulted on the Subject Loan. (See, e.g., id. ¶ 10.) She also alleges claims against Defendants under the following causes of action: (1) Truth in Lending Act ("TILA"), 15 U.S.C. § 1641(g), (2) Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6), (3) Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ("RESPA"), 12 U.S.C. § 2605, (4) Rosenthal Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 1788, et seq., (5) breach of contract, and (6) California Civil Code §§ 2943, 2924h(g).

II. Judicial Notice

Defendants request that the court take judicial notice of nine documents that are matters of public record: (1) A Grant Deed recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office as instrument number XX-XXXXXXX, (2) A Grant Deed recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office as instrument number 03 3242821, (3) A deed of Trust recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office as instrument number XXXXXXXXXXX, (4) A true and correct copy of the Purchase and Assumption Agreement (the "P & A Agreement") whereby Defendant acquired certain assets of Washington Mutual Bank, F.A. from the FDIC acting as receiver, including the Loan, available for retrieval at http://www.fdic.gov/about/freedom/Washington_Mutual_P_and_A.pdf. (5) An Assignment of Deed of Trust recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office as instrument number XXXXXXXXXXX, (6) A Notice of Default recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office as instrument number XXXXXXXXXXX, (7) A Notice of Trustee's Sale recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office as instrument number XXXXXXXXXXX, (8) A Notice of Rescission recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office as instrument number XXXXXXXXXXX, (9) A Notice of Trustee's Sale recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office as instrument number XXXXXXXXXXX, (10) A Notice of Default recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office as instrument number XXXXXXXXXXX, (11) A Notice of Default recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office as instrument number XXXXXXXXXXX.

Under Federal Rule of Evidence 201, a court may take judicial notice of "matters of public record." Mack v. South Bay Beer Distrib. , 798 F.2d 1279, 1282 (9th Cir. 1986). Documents (1)-(3) and (5)-(11) are public records of the Orange County Recorder's Office such that their authenticity is capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.

Furthermore, it is appropriate to take judicial notice of information obtained from governmental websites, rendering it "capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned." Fed.R.Evid. 201(b); Paralyzed Veterans of America v. McPherson , 2008 WL 4183981, *5-*6 (N.D. Cal., Sept. 9, 2008)(collecting cases). Document (4) is available at a government website and therefore appropriate for judicial notice.

Consequently, this court GRANTS Defendants' unopposed request for judicial notice of Documents (1)-(11).

III. LEGAL STANDARD

A complaint will survive a motion to dismiss when it contains "sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal , 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). When considering a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, a court must "accept astrue all allegations of material fact and must construe those facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff." Resnick v. Hayes , 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000). Although a complaint need not include "detailed factual allegations, " it must offer "more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation." Iqbal , 556 U.S. at 678. Conclusory allegations or allegations that are no more than a statement of a legal conclusion "are not entitled to the assumption of truth." Id. at 679. In other words, a pleading that merely offers "labels and conclusions, " a "formulaic recitation of the elements, " or "naked assertions" will not be sufficient to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Id. at 678 (citations and internal quotation marks omitted).

"When there are well-pleaded factual allegations, a court should assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief." Id. at 679. Plaintiffs must allege "plausible grounds to infer" that their claims rise "above the speculative level." Twombly , 550 U.S. at 555. "Determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief" is a "context-specific task that ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.