Consuelo Gonzalez LaBrada v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company et al

Filing 67

JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B. AND MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. by Judge Christina A. Snyder: On 7/18/2011, the Court granted Moving Defendants Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (& quot;Deutsche Bank"), One West Bank, F.S.B. ("OneWest"), and Mortgage Electronic Registration System, Inc.'s ("MERS") Motion to Dismiss the First Amended Complaint 47 without leave to amend. The Court granted, with pre judice, Moving Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiff's fourth cause of action for Violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1692F(6) and twelfth cause of action for Tortious Violation of Real Estate Settlemen t Procedures Act, and granted, without prejudice, Moving Defendants' motion to dismiss the remaining state law claims. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that a Judgment of Dismissal be entered in favor of Deutsche Bank, OneWest and MERS, and against Plaintiff. Based on said judgment, Plaintiff shall take nothing by way of the first amended complaint against Deutsche Bank, OneWest and MERS. Each side shall bear its own fees and costs. (gk)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 AT LOS ANGELES – SPRING STREET 11 12 CONSUELO GONZALEZ LaBRADA, 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 vs. Case No. 2:10-cv-07373-CAS -FMO Plaintiff, JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST TRUST COMPANY, ONEWEST COMPANY; HOME LOAN FUNDING, BANK, F.S.B. AND MORTGAGE INC., a corporate entity, its assignees and/or ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION its successors-in-interest; INDYMAC SYSTEMS, INC. BANK, F.S.B., its assignees and/or its successors-in-interest; ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B., its assignees and/or its successors-ininterest; ORANGE COAST TITLE COMPANY; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS, INC., a Delaware corporate entity; QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION, a corporate entity; LSI TITLE COMPANY; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; AMERICAN SECURITIES COMPANY; and DOES 1-100, inclusive, 22 Defendants. 23 24 On July 18, 2011, the Court granted the motion of defendants DEUTSCHE 25 BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY ("Deutsche Bank"), ONEWEST BANK, 26 F.S.B. ("OneWest") and MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION 27 SYSTEMS, INC. ("MERS") (collectively, "Moving Defendants") to dismiss the first 28 amended complaint of plaintiff CONSUELO GONZALEZ LABRADA ("Plaintiff"), LAW OFFICES Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP 902569.02/LA -1- JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF DEUTSCHE BANK, ONEWEST AND MERS Case No. 2:10-cv-07373-CAS -FMO 1 without leave to amend. The Court granted, with prejudice, Moving Defendants' 2 motion to dismiss Plaintiff's fourth cause of action for Violations of the Fair Debt 3 Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692F(6) and twelfth cause of action for 4 Tortious Violation of Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, and granted, without 5 prejudice, Moving Defendants' motion to dismiss the remaining state law claims. 6 Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that a 7 Judgment of Dismissal be entered in favor of Deutsche Bank, OneWest and MERS, 8 and against Plaintiff. Based on said judgment, Plaintiff shall take nothing by way of 9 the first amended complaint against Deutsche Bank, OneWest and MERS. Each 10 side shall bear its own fees and costs. 11 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 14 DATED: January 9, 2012 JUDGE OF THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT 15 16 17 Respectfully submitted: 18 ALLEN MATKINS LECK GAMBLE MALLORY & NATSIS LLP 19 DAVID C. BOLSTAD RYAN T. WAGGONER 20 21 By: /s/ Ryan T. Waggoner RYAN T. WAGGONER 22 Attorneys for Defendants DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL 23 TRUST COMPANY, ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B. and MORTGAGE 24 ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. 25 26 27 28 LAW OFFICES Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP 902569.02/LA -2- JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF DEUTSCHE BANK, ONEWEST AND MERS Case No. 2:10-cv-07373-CAS -FMO

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?