Mark Fam v. Bank of America (USA)

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:17-cv-00319-AJT-JFA. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000335027]. Mailed to: Mark Fam. [17-2298]

Appeal: 17-2298

Doc: 18

Filed: 07/24/2018

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-2298

MARK FAM,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA (USA); GREEN TREE SERVICING, LLC, a/k/a Ditech
Financial LLC; DITECH FINANCIAL LLC,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION; DANIEL WHITEHEAD;
ROSENBERG LAW FIRM,
Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, District Judge. (1:17-cv-00319-AJT-JFA)

Submitted: June 29, 2018

Decided: July 24, 2018

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, TRAXLER, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Dismissed in part, affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Appeal: 17-2298

Doc: 18

Filed: 07/24/2018

Pg: 2 of 3

Mark Fam, Appellant Pro Se. Nathaniel Patrick Lee, MCGUIREWOODS, LLP, Tysons
Corner, Virginia; Andrew Michael Williamson, BLANK ROME LLP, Washington, D.C.,
for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 17-2298

Doc: 18

Filed: 07/24/2018

Pg: 3 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Mark Fam appeals the district court’s order dismissing his amended complaint for
failure to state a claim. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Fam first challenges the transfer of
his action from the District Court for the District of Columbia to the District Court for the
Eastern District of Virginia. However, we do not have jurisdiction to review this transfer
because Fam failed to challenge the change of venue in the Eastern District of Virginia.
See Brock v. Entre Comput. Ctrs., Inc., 933 F.2d 1253, 1257 (4th Cir. 1991). Accordingly,
we dismiss Fam’s appeal as to the transfer. With regard to the dismissal of Fam’s claims
for failure to state a claim, we have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Fam v. Bank of Am.,
No. 1:17-cv-00319-AJT-JFA (E.D. Va., Oct. 10, 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.
DISMISSED IN PART;
AFFIRMED IN PART

3