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)
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?