Travis Phillips v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.


UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-50692 Affirmed ] Judge: PEH , Judge: ECP , Judge: CH Mandate pull date is 02/13/2017 [16-50692]

Download PDF
Case: 16-50692 Document: 00513845359 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/23/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 16-50692 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED January 23, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk TRAVIS R. PHILLIPS, Plaintiff - Appellant v. JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., Defendant - Appellee Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:16-CV-287 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, PRADO, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* For the fifth time, Travis Phillips (“Phillips”) filed suit in an effort to block foreclosure on his home by the lender, JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“Chase”). After taking judicial notice of materials from the fourth lawsuit, the district court granted Chase’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. On appeal, Phillips challenges only the district court’s adverse decision on Phillips’s claim that the attempted foreclosure is untimely. Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 16-50692 Document: 00513845359 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/23/2017 No. 16-50692 In the district court, Phillips argued that Chase previously accelerated the debt in question and then failed to foreclose within the relevant limitations period. Chase argued, and the district court agreed, that its April 11, 2014 letter represented an abandonment of the earlier acceleration and that Phillips’s efforts to distinguish relevant precedents are unavailing. We agree with the district court. See Boren v. U.S. Nat’l Bank Assoc., 807 F.3d 99, 106 (5th Cir. 2015). AFFIRMED. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?