Myers v. Flagstar Bank, FSB et al

Filing 31

ORDER OF DISMISSAL: IT IS ORDERED that this action and all claims asserted herein are DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Any trial date and pretrial dates previously set are hereby VACATED. Signed by Judge Ronald B. Leighton. (DN)

1

HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT TACOMA

7
8

GREGORY A. MYERS,

CASE NO. C15-5067 RBL

9
Plaintiff,
10
v.

ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S
CASE FOR LACK OF SUBJECTMATTER JURISDICTION

11
FLAGSTAR BANK, FSB

Dkt. # 15 and 29

12
Defendant.
13
14

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant Flagstar’s Motion to Dismiss

15 [Dkt. # 15] and Plaintiff Gregory Myers’ Second Amended Complaint [Dkt. # 29]. In its prior
16 Order, the Court dismissed Myers’ claims but granted him leave to amend his complaint to assert
17 an actionable claim against Flagstar [Dkt. # 28].
18

Myers’s Second Amended Complaint alleges that Flagstar violated 11 U.S.C. § 524(a) by

19 mailing him monthly mortgage billing statements on a discharged debt. It asks the Court to hold
20 Flagstar in contempt under 11 U.S.C. § 105.
21

An action for contempt based on violation of a discharge order must be brought by

22 motion in the bankruptcy court. See Barrientos v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 633 F.3d 1186, 1189
23 (9th Cir. 2011); see also Walls v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 276 F.3d 502, 509 (9th Cir. 2002)
24
ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S CASE FOR
LACK OF SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION - 1

1 (reasoning that a bankruptcy judge who issued a discharge order giving rise to an injunction
2 should enforce it). Myer’s Second Amended Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT
3 PREJUDICE under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

Dated this 15th day of October, 2015.

7

A

8

Ronald B. Leighton
United States District Judge

6

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

DKT. # 15 AND 29 - 2