WILLIAM Q. HAYES, District Judge.
The matter before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint filed by Defendants JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., an acquirer of certain assets and liabilities of Washington Mutual Bank from the Federal Deposition Insurance Corporation Acting as Receiver, erroneously sued as "Chase Bank, " and California Reconveyance Company. (ECF No. 19).
On May 30, 2012, Plaintiff Sepehr Torabi, proceeding pro se, initiated this action by filing the Complaint against Washington Mutual Bank, Chase Bank, Deutsche Bank, Citibank and California Reconveyance Company. (ECF No. 1).
On January 23, 2013, the Court granted a Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendant California Reconveyance Company (ECF No. 3), and instructed Plaintiff to file any motion for leave to amend the Complaint within 30 days. (ECF No. 7).
On February 26, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 13), which the Court granted on March 22, 2013. (ECF No. 17). On July 9, 2013, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint against Defendants California Reconveyance Company, Chase Bank, Citibank, Deutsche Bank and Washington Mutual Bank. (ECF No. 18).
On July 25, 2013, Defendants JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., an acquirer of certain assets and liabilities of Washington Mutual Bank from the Federal Deposition Insurance Corporation Acting as Receiver, and California Reconveyance Company ("moving Defendants") filed the Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). (ECF No. 19). On August 23, 2013, Plaintiff filed an opposition. (ECF No. 22). On August 27, 2013, Defendants JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. and California Reconveyance Company filed a reply. (ECF No. 23).
ALLEGATIONS OF THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
In the First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff makes the following factual allegations:
Plaintiff is the owner of real property... (hereinafter the Subject Property')...
9. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants, WAMU, CHASE, and DEUTSCHE BANK conducted a Trustee Sale and unlawfully perfected foreclosure on Plaintiffs real property... ostensibly to collect the unpaid balance on the Note secured by the security instrument that is identified in Exhibit 3.'...
14. This action arises out of Defendant[']s interference with Plaintiff[']s due process and equal protections which was part of a broad conspiracy to deprive homeowners of due process in foreclosure proceedings in order to advance their financial interests. State action exists under California Code of Civil Procedure [section] 367  and California Civil Code [section] 2924 [, ] et seq.
15. On or about September 01, 2008, Plaintiff entered into a loan modification program with Defendant CHASE, who had recently acquired Plaintiff[']s Note from the then defunct Washington Mutual Bank.
16. On or about June 01, 2009, Defendant CHASE sent Plaintiff a faulty loan modification package, requesting an increase in his monthly payment of approximately 45% notwithstanding that they had transferred and assigned Plaintiff[']s Note to Deutsche Bank nearly six months earlier.
17. Plaintiff contacted Defendant CHASE regarding the increase and was informed by CHASE that his loan had been sold to Deutsche Bank, and that he would have to negotiate a loan modification with them.
18. Plaintiff discovered that on or about January 28, 2009, an Assignment of Deed of Trust (Assignment') regarding Plaintiff's Deed of Trust, (DOT'), was recorded with the San Diego County Recorder's Office... The Assignment assigned Deutsche Bank, N.A, as trustee for WAMU... and was assigned all beneficial interest under Plaintiff's DOT'.
19. At that time, Plaintiff contacted Defendant Deutsche Bank regarding modification of his loan, and was informed that they had just recently acquired the loan and he would be contacted by ...