Robert Townsend v. Chase Bank USA Na

Good Law
445 F. App'x 920
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 1, 201109-55452California328 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Robert Townsend appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging, among other claims, viola tions of the federal and California Fair Debt Collection Practices Acts (“FDCPA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim, Guerrero v. RJM Acquisitions LLC, 499 F.3d 926, 932 (9th Cir.2007) (per curiam), and for an abuse of discretion a denial of leave to amend, Chodos v. West Publ’g Co., 292 F.3d 992, 1003 (9th Cir.2002). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record, Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., LP, 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir.2008), and we affirm.

Townsend’s federal and California FDCPA claims arising from the Mann Bracken letters are barred by the one-year statute of limitations. See 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d); Cal. Civ.Code § 1788.30(f); Mangum v. Action Collection Serv., Inc., 575 F.3d 935, 940 (9th Cir.2009) (“[A] limitations period begins to run when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of the injury which is the basis of the action.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). Townsend fails to state a claim under the federal or California FDCPA as to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.