Victor H. Clarke v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. et al
Filing
15
JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL by Judge R. Gary Klausner. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: The Complaint is dismissed as to Wells Fargo and Quality, as toa ll causes of action, with prejudice; Judgment is entered in favor of defendants Wells Fargo Quality; and Plaintiff, Victor H. Clarke will recover nothing in this action from either defendant Wells Fargo nor Quality. (bp)
1
2
JS-6
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 Victor H. Clarke,
Plaintiff,
12
13
CASE NO.: 5:17-cv-00118-RGK-SP
JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL
v.
14 WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, [Assigned to the Hon. R. Gary
Klausner]
INC. aka WELLS FARGO BANK,
15 LTD; QUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATION; AND DOES 1 THRU
16 50, inclusive,
Defendants.
17
18
19
20
On April 3, 2017, the Court entered an Order granting the Motion to Dismiss
21 the Complaint, filed by defendant WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., successor by
22 merger with Wells Fargo Bank Southwest, N.A., f/k/a Wachovia Mortgage, FSB,
23 f/k/a World Savings Bank, FSB, erroneously sued as “WELLS FARGO HOME
24 MORTGAGE, INC. aka WELLS FARGO BANK, LTD” (“Wells Fargo”)
25 dismissing the Complaint in its entirety, without leave to amend.
On April 13, 2017, the Court entered a further order dismissing Quality
26
27 Loan Service Corporation (“Quality”) for the reasons set forth in Wells Fargo’s
28 motion to dismiss.
93000/FR2155/01752941-2
1
CASE NO.: 5:17-CV-00118-RGK-SP
[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL
1
Accordingly:
2
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:
3
1.
The Complaint is dismissed as to Wells Fargo and Quality, as to all
4 causes of action, with prejudice;
5
2.
Judgment is entered in favor of defendants Wells Fargo and Quality;
3.
Plaintiff, Victor H. Clarke will recover nothing in this action from
6 and
7
8 either defendant Wells Fargo nor Quality.
9
10
11 DATED: 6/22/17
12
HON. R. GARY KLAUSNER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
93000/FR2155/01752941-2
2
CASE NO.: 5:17-CV-00118-RGK-SP
[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL
1
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
2
I, the undersigned, declare that I am over the age of 18 and am not a party to
3 this action. I am employed in the City of Pasadena, California; my business
address is Anglin, Flewelling, Rasmussen, Campbell & Trytten LLP, 301 N. Lake
4 Avenue, Suite 1100, Pasadena, California 91101-2459.
5
On the date below, I served a copy of the foregoing document entitled:
6
[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL
7 on the interested parties in said case as follows:
8
Served By Means Other Than the Court’s CM/ECF System:
9
Plaintiff Pro Se:
Victor H. Clarke
45675 Sugarloaf Mountain Trail
Indian Wells, CA 92210
10
11
12
COURTESY COPY
Attorneys for Defendant Quality
Loan Service Corporation:
13
14
Tel.: 619.645-7711 ǀ Fax: 619.568.3518
15
Email: dgoulding@qualityloan.com
jmolteni@qualityloan.com
16
17
18
19
20
21
Julie O. Molteni, Esq.
QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION
411 Ivy Street
San Diego, CA 92101
BY MAIL: I am readily familiar with the firm’s practice of collection and
processing correspondence by mailing. Under that same practice it would
be deposited with U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage fully
prepaid at Pasadena, California in the ordinary course of business. I am
aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if
postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after
date of deposit for mailing in affidavit.
22
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
America that the foregoing is true and correct. I declare that I am employed in the
23 office of a member of the Bar of this Court, at whose direction the service was
24 made. This declaration is executed in Pasadena, California on June 20, 2017.
25
26
Carol Goodwin
(Type or Print Name)
/s/ Carol Goodwin
(Signature of Declarant)
27
28
93000/FR2155/01752941-2
CASE NO. 5:17-CV-00118-RGK-SP
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
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?