Emeterio Simon v. PNC Bank, N.A.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:16-cv-00388-AWA-LRL. Copies to all parties and the district court. [1000305258]. [17-2139]

Appeal: 17-2139

Doc: 23

Filed: 06/01/2018

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-2139

EMETERIO H. SIMON; DIANA C. SIMON,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
PNC BANK, N.A.; FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION;
SAMUEL I. WHITE, P.C., As Substitute Trustee,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Norfolk. Arenda L. Wright Allen, District Judge. (2:16-cv-00388-AWA-LRL)

Submitted: May 23, 2018

Decided: June 1, 2018

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and AGEE and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Henry W. McLaughlin, III, LAW OFFICE OF HENRY MCLAUGHLIN, P.C.,
Richmond, Virginia, for Appellants. Christopher L. Perkins, Jonathan A. Haist,
LECLAIRRYAN, Richmond, Virginia; Lisa H. Kim, SAMUEL I. WHITE, P.C.,
Virginia Beach, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 17-2139

Doc: 23

Filed: 06/01/2018

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Emeterio H. Simon and Diana C. Simon appeal the district court’s order granting
Defendants’ motions to dismiss and dismissing the Simons’ complaint regarding the
procedures used to foreclose on their home.

We review de novo a district court’s

dismissal of a complaint under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), accepting factual allegations in
the complaint as true and “drawing all reasonable inferences in [the plaintiffs’] favor.”
Mason v. Mach. Zone, Inc., 851 F.3d 315, 319 (4th Cir. 2017). We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error.

We also find that certification to the Virginia

Supreme Court is unnecessary. See Va. Sup. Ct. R. 5:40(a); Roe v. Doe, 28 F.3d 404, 407
(4th Cir. 1994) (“Only if the available state law is clearly insufficient should the court
certify the issue to the state court.”). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the
district court. See Simon v. PNC Bank, N.A., No. 2:16-cv-00388-AWA-LRL (E.D. Va.
Aug. 29, 2017). We dispense with oral 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