698 Fed.Appx. 469 (9th Cir. 2017), 16-35590, Tashiro-Townley v. Bank of New York Mellon Corp.

Docket Nº:16-35590
Citation:698 Fed.Appx. 469
Party Name:Stephanie TASHIRO-TOWNLEY; Scott C. Townley, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP., as Trustee FOR the CERTIFICATEHOLDERS CWL, INC. ASSET BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-10; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Attorney:Stephanie Tashiro-Townley, Maple Valley, WA, pro se. Scott C. Townley, Covington, WA, pro se. John Eugene Glowney, Stoel Rives LLP, Seattle, WA, Neeru Jindal, Yu Mohandesi LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
Judge Panel:Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Case Date:October 05, 2017
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 469

698 Fed.Appx. 469 (9th Cir. 2017)

Stephanie TASHIRO-TOWNLEY; Scott C. Townley, Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON CORP., as Trustee FOR the CERTIFICATEHOLDERS CWL, INC. ASSET BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-10; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-35590

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

October 5, 2017

Submitted September 26, 2017 [*]

Editorial Note:

Governing the citation to unpublished opinions please refer to federal rules of appellate procedure rule 32.1. See also U.S.Ct. of App. 9th Cir. Rule 36-3.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, John C. Coughenour, District Judge, Presiding, D.C. No. 2:10-cv-01720-JCC

Page 470

Stephanie Tashiro-Townley, Maple Valley, WA, pro se.

Scott C. Townley, Covington, WA, pro se.

John Eugene Glowney, Stoel Rives LLP, Seattle, WA, Neeru Jindal, Yu Mohandesi LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before: SILVERMAN, TALLMAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM[**]

Stephanie Tashiro-Townley and Scott C. Townley appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing their diversity action related to their claim under the Washington Consumer Protection Act (" WCPA" ). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Knievel v. ESPN, 393 F.3d 1068, 1071-72 (9th Cir. 2005). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed appellants’ action because appellants failed to allege facts sufficient to show that defendants engaged in an unfair or deceptive act that caused appellants’ injury. See Bavand v. OneWest Bank, 196 Wash.App. 813, 385 P.3d 233, 247-48 (2016) (setting forth elements for challenges under the WCPA); see also Wash. Rev. Code. § 61.24.30(4) (setting forth shortened notice requirements for a trustee’s sale conducted after a federal bankruptcy stay is lifted); Bain v. Metro . Mortg. Grp., Inc., 175 Wash.2d 83, 285 P.3d 34, 52 (2012) (en banc) (explaining that " the mere fact MERS is listed on the deed of trust as a beneficiary is not itself an actionable injury" ).

The district court did not abuse...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP