Elena Margaritis v. U.S. Bank Na

MEMORANDUM

Elena Margaritis appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her diversity action arising out of foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (e)(2), Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.Sd 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order), and for an abuse of discretion the denial of leave to amend a complaint, Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1041 (9th Cir.2011). We may affirm on any basis supported by the record, Johnson v. Riverside Healthcare Sys., LP, 534 F.3d 1116, 1121 (9th Cir.2008), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Margaritis’s claim for “false and fraudulent recordations” because Margaritis did not allege facts showing that defendant had knowingly recorded a false claim on her property. See Cervantes, 656 F.3d at 1038-44 (explaining the recording system and rejecting challenges to its validity).

The district court properly dismissed Margaritis’s claim for violations of Arizona’s Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”) because Arizona law does “not require compliance with the UCC before a trustee commences a non judicial foreclosure.” Hogan v. Wash.…