Deutsche Bank Natl Trust Co v. Ivy Inocencio

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cv-00015-TSE-MSN. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999731512].. [15-1391]

Appeal: 15-1391

Doc: 22

Filed: 01/07/2016

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-1391

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE FOR
CARRINGTON MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST, SERIES 2005-OPT2, ASSET
BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-OPT 2,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
IVY K. INOCENCIO; MARISSA P. GOMEZ; EQUITY TRUSTEES, LLC;
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
T. S. Ellis, III, Senior
District Judge. (1:15-cv-00015-TSE-MSN)

Submitted:

December 29, 2015

Decided:

January 7, 2016

Before GREGORY and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

S. Mohsin Reza, Mary C. Zinsner, TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP, Tysons
Corner, Virginia, for Appellant.
Carolina D. Ciraolo, Acting
Assistant Attorney General, Thomas J. Clark, Regina S. Mariarty,
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-1391

Doc: 22

Filed: 01/07/2016

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. brought suit in Virginia
state court seeking rescission of a foreclosure sale that took
place

approximately

removed

the

action

four
to

years

district

earlier.
court

The

and

pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1), (6).

United

moved

to

States
dismiss

The district court

granted the motion to dismiss as to the United States, based on
lack

of

subject

matter

jurisdiction.

Because

there

were

no

viable remaining claims as against the remaining defendants, the
court

also

dismissed

the

action

in

its

entirety.

We

have

reviewed the parties’ briefs, as well as the record on appeal,
and

find

district

no

reversible

court’s

error.

judgment.

We

Accordingly,
dispense

with

we

affirm

oral

the

argument

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

2