United States District Court, N.D. California
RODRICK I. SATRE and BONITA SATRE DALEY, et al, Plaintiff,
WELLS FARGO BANK, NA et al., Defendant.
ORDER DENYING POST-JUDGMENT MOTIONS
JEFFREY S. WHITE, District Judge.
Now before the Court are the motions filed by Plaintiffs to vacate this Court's order of dismissal and to amend or correct the judgment. Since the Court issued judgment in this matter after granting multiple motions to dismiss on September 16, 2014, Plaintiffs appearing pro se have filed five motions styled in various ways challenging the Court's determination that the case must be dismissed. Having carefully reviewed the parties' papers and considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the Court HEREBY DENIES Plaintiffs' post-judgment motions challenging the dismissal and entry of judgment in this matter.
On December 11, 2006, Plaintiffs filed an action against Defendants First American Servicing Company ("ASC"), First American (the trustee of plaintiff's deed of trust) and Wells Fargo entitled Satre v. American Services Co., Action No, MSC 06-02525 ("State Court Action"). The State Court Action involved claims based on a promissory note that Plaintiffs executed and secured by a deed of trust on their property at 530 Santa Fe Avenue, Richmond, California 94801. Plaintiffs alleged that they called ASC to discuss ways to avoid foreclosing on their house due to short term financial difficulties. Plaintiffs then defaulted and entered into a forbearance agreement to allow them to cure the default and Defendant ASC proceeded with foreclosure on the property in December 2006. Plaintiffs soon filed action to enjoin the foreclosure sale and, on August 12, 2010, the state issued a Statement of Decision in favor of ACS.
On April 2, 2010, appearing pro se, Plaintiffs filed a complaint before this Court against Wells Fargo, ASC, and First American alleging fourteen separate causes of action for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1692 et seq. ("FDCPA"), multiple causes of action sounding in fraud, defamation of character, and unfair business practices. In addition to suing Defendants for activities related to the loan servicing and foreclosure proceedings on their home, Plaintiffs also named Glenn Wechsler ("Wechsler"), counsel for ASC in the State Court Action, for his conduct in the state litigation.
Facing multiple motions to dismiss and to strike, on October 15, 2010, Plaintiffs filed their First Amended/Supplemental Complaint which alleged twenty-two separate causes of action including claims under the FDCPA and multiple state causes of action.
Defendants First American and Wechsler then moved to dismiss the First Amended Complaint. On January 5, 2011, this Court granted First American's and Wechsler's motion to dismiss and dismissed the case under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. The Ninth Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. Satre v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. et al., 507 Fed.Appx. 655, 655 (9th Cir. 2013). The Ninth Circuit agreed the "district court property determined that Wechsler is immune from FDCPA liability" but reversed, stating "the district court incorrectly concluded that it lacked jurisdiction under Rooker-Feldman doctrine." Id. at 655-56.
On remand, Defendants Wells Fargo and First American moved to dismiss the suit and, in the alternative, moved for a more definite statement. In the related matter, C 12-06548 JSW, the same defendants move to dismiss or for a more definite statement. The later-filed case involved the same parties, the same property, related the same mortgage loan and the servicing of that loan. The later case added a new Notice of Trustee Sale that Plaintiffs allege had been more recently been posted on their door.
On November 1, 2013, the Court granted Wells Fargo's motion to dismiss, granted First American's motion for a more definite statement, and dismissed the later, related matter in favor of a consolidated amended complaint in this matter. Plaintiffs were instructed to amend their complaint for the third time to be in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) and 9(b) and specifically to comply with the mandate of the order regarding the claims under FDCPA giving this Court jurisdiction to hear this matter.
On December 6, 2013, Plaintiffs filed a second amended consolidated and supplemental complaint that was one hundred and five pages in length and alleged fourteen separate causes of action against twelve defendants including claims under the FDCPA, TILA, FCRA, and RESPA, as well as multiple state causes of action, violations of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Constitution.
On September 16, 2014, this Court issued a ruling granting motions to dismiss filed by Defendants First American Trustee Servicing Solutions, LLC ("First American"), Ameriquest Mortgage Company ("Ameriquest"), Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo"), and the motion to dismiss and motion to strike filed by Glenn Wechsler, all without leave to amend. The same day, the Court issued final judgment in this matter.
Plaintiffs have filed a motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration, or in the alternative, in a series of filings, Plaintiffs move for relief from judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1), (2) and (3) and to alter or amend the judgment pursuant to Rule 59(e).
The Court shall address additional facts as necessary to its analysis in the ...