Josefa Lopez v. Executive Trustee Service

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs, homeowners whose home loans have fallen into default, appeal the district court’s order dismissing their Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 9(b) and 12(b)(6). We affirm.

Plaintiffs challenge the order of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) transferring this case to the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona (“MDL Court”) and the MDL Court’s order interpreting the JPML’s order. We lack jurisdiction to review the JPML’s order because Plaintiffs have not sought a writ of mandamus. 28 U.S.C. § 1407 (e); see In re Wilson, 451 F.3d 161, 168 (3d Cir.2006). Plaintiffs waived their challenge to the MDL Court’s order by not “specifically and distinctly” arguing it in their opening brief. Kim v. Kang, 154 F.3d 996 , 1000 (9th Cir.1998).

The district court properly dismissed Plaintiffs’ fraud in the inducement claims for failure to plead fraud with particularity. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 9(b). In order to successfully plead claims grounded in fraud, a complaint must “state the time, place, and specific content of the false representations as well as the identities of the parties to the misrepresentation.”…