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)
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?