Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC et al

Filing 85

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties each file a STATUS REPORT within fourteen (14) days of this order informing the court of their positions and the status of this case. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 10/18/2023. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ALZ)

Case 2:18-cv-00597-JCM-VCF Document 85 Filed 10/18/23 Page 1 of 2

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6

***

7
8

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST
COMPANY,

ORDER
Plaintiff(s),

9
v.

10
11

Case No. 2:18-CV-597 JCM (VCF)

SFR INVESTMENTS POOL I, LLC, et al.,
Defendant(s).

12
13

Presently before the court is the matter of Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. SFR

14
15
16
17
18
19

Investments Pool 1, LLC et al., case number 2:18-cv-00597-JCM-VCF.
This is a homeowners association foreclosure case. On April 3, 2018, plaintiff Deutsche Bank
National Trust Company filed a quiet title action against the defendants, Springs at Centennial
Ranch Homeowners Association (the “HOA”) and SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC (“SFR”).
(ECF No. 1).
The HOA was dismissed—with prejudice—from the case via stipulation on November 2,

20
21
22

2018. (ECF No. 25). SFR then counterclaimed for quiet title and injunctive relief against the
plaintiff. 1 (ECF No. 28).
In 2019, SFR moved to dismiss plaintiff’s amended complaint. (ECF No. 55). Plaintiff

23
24
25
26

moved for summary judgment on SFR’s counterclaims. (ECF No.57). The court granted SFR’s
motion to dismiss on statute-of-limitations grounds and denied plaintiff’s motion for summary
judgment. (ECF No. 64).

27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

SFR also filed “cross-claims” against three parties who have since had default judgments
entered against them. (ECF Nos. 76, 77, 78).
1

Case 2:18-cv-00597-JCM-VCF Document 85 Filed 10/18/23 Page 2 of 2

1
2

Plaintiff subsequently appealed the court’s order. (ECF No. 72). The Ninth Circuit then
ordered a temporary administrative closure of the case. (ECF No. 79).

3

On October 5, 2023, the Ninth Circuit entered a memorandum dismissing plaintiff’s

4

appeal for lack of jurisdiction. (ECF No. 84). Specifically, the Ninth Circuit stated that the

5

order appealed from (ECF No. 64) was not a final judgement because SFR’s counterclaims are

6

still pending. (Id. at 2).

7

Accordingly,

8
9
10
11
12

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties each file a STATUS REPORT within
fourteen (14) days of this order informing the court of their positions and the status of this case.
DATED October 18, 2023.
__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge

-2-