Frank Hampton v. Accredited Home Lenders, Inc.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 8:16-cv-01334-JFM Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000105363]. Mailed to: F Hampton. [17-1241]

Appeal: 17-1241

Doc: 13

Filed: 06/22/2017

Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-1241

FRANK E. HAMPTON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ACCREDITED HOME LENDERS, INCORPORATED; DEUTSCHE BANK
NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, as Trustee for Securitized Trust HSI Asset
Securitization Corporation Trust 2007-HE1; HSBC BANK USA, N.A.; HSI
ASSET SECURITIZATION CORPORATION; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.;
MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, a/k/a MERS; DOES
1 THROUGH 100, Inclusive,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
J. Frederick Motz, Senior District Judge. (8:16-cv-01334-JFM)

Submitted: June 20, 2017

Decided: June 22, 2017

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Frank E. Hampton, Appellant Pro Se. Daniel A. Glass, ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN
& MELLOTT, LLC, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

Appeal: 17-1241

Doc: 13

Filed: 06/22/2017

Pg: 2 of 4

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 17-1241

Doc: 13

Filed: 06/22/2017

Pg: 3 of 4

PER CURIAM:
Frank E. Hampton appeals the district court’s order granting a motion to dismiss
filed by Defendants Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., HSBC Bank USA, National
Association, HSI Asset Securitization Corp., Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., and Mortgage
Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (“Moving Defendants”) and dismissing all claims
against Moving Defendants.

“[W]e have an independent obligation to verify the

existence of appellate jurisdiction” and may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders
and certain interlocutory and collateral orders. Porter v. Zook, 803 F.3d 694, 696 (4th
Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted); see 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291, 1292 (2012); Fed.
R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949).
“Ordinarily, a district court order is not final until it has resolved all claims as to all
parties.” Porter, 803 F.3d at 696 (internal quotation marks omitted). “Regardless of the
label given a district court decision, if it appears from the record that the district court has
not adjudicated all of the issues in a case, then there is no final order.” Id.
In his complaint, Hampton alleged multiple causes of action against Moving
Defendants, as well as Accredited Home Lenders, Inc. (“Accredited”); the record reflects
that Accredited was served but never filed an answer or a motion to dismiss. The district
court granted Moving Defendants’ motion to dismiss but did not address any claims
against Accredited. Thus, the court “never issued a final decision.” Id. at 699.
Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand to the
district court. We express no view on the ultimate disposition of Hampton’s claims
against Accredited.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
3

Appeal: 17-1241

Doc: 13

Filed: 06/22/2017

Pg: 4 of 4

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

DISMISSED AND REMANDED

4