Atienza et al v. Wells Fargo et al

Filing 15

AMENDED ORDER GRANTING 8 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Wells Fargo and Golden West Savings Association Service Company. The Court GRANTS Defendants' motion to dismiss without leave to amend, and the complaint is dismissed with prejudice as to all defendants with the exception of U.S. Bancorp. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 10/14/2011. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service)(tmi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/14/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 8 ALICIA G. ATIENZA, et al., 9 Plaintiffs, AMENDED ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS v. 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 No. C-11-3153 EMC WELLS FARGO, et al., 12 Defendants. ___________________________________/ (Docket No. 8) 13 14 15 Defendants Wachovia Mortgage, a division of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., successor by merger 16 to Wells Fargo Bank Southwest, N.A., formerly known as Wachovia Mortgage, FSB and World 17 Savings Bank, FSB (sued herein as “Wells Fargo, successor by the merger to Wachovia, fka as the 18 World Savings Bank, FSB”) and Golden West Savings Association Service Co. (collectively, “Wells 19 Fargo”), filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint on July 20, 2011.1 Docket No. 8. 20 Defendants argued that the complaint was unintelligible and failed to state a claim against any 21 defendant, and to the extent the subject matter of the complaint was discernable, it was barred by res 22 judicata. 23 The Court, having considered the parties’ submissions and Defendants' request for judicial 24 notice, determines that the matters are appropriate for resolution without oral argument, and 25 VACATES the hearing set for September 8, 2011. The Court hereby enters the following order: 26 27 28 1 The remaining defendant, U.S. Bancorp, has not appeared or filed a motion in this action. 1 (1) Defendants' request for judicial notice (Docket No. 9) is GRANTED. The 2 documents are undisputed matters of public record. See Fed. R. Evid. 201; see also Camacho v. 3 Wachovia Mortgage, FSB, No. 09-CV-1572 JLS, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102243, at *4 (S.D. Cal. 4 Nov. 3, 2009) (taking judicial notice of the same documents as Exhibits A-D here). 5 (2) Plaintiffs’ complaint is unintelligible and fails to articulate a cognizable claim against 6 any defendant. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) (“[A] complaint must contain 7 sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.”) 8 (internal quotations omitted). This complaint falls well short of this benchmark. In addition, the 9 only indication of the subject matter of the complaint are Plaintiffs’ exhibits: the deed of trust and notice of trustee’s sale for the same subject property that was at issue between the parties in Atienza 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. C 10-03457 RS, 2011 U.S. Dist. Lexis 22592 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 7, 12 2011), which Judge Seeborg dismissed with prejudice. Thus, the current action concerns the “same 13 transactional nucleus of fact” as litigated in the prior matter, and therefore any attempt to amend the 14 pleadings would be futile because the suit is barred by res judicata. Int’l Union v. Karr, 994 F.2d 15 1426, 1430 (9th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Defendants' motion to dismiss 16 without leave to amend, and the complaint is dismissed with prejudice as to all defendants with the 17 exception of U.S. Bancorp. 18 This disposes of Docket No. 8. 19 20 IT IS SO ORDERED. 21 22 Dated: October 14, 2011 23 _________________________ EDWARD M. CHEN United States District Judge 24 25 26 27 28 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?