Adegbenga Adesokan v. U.S. Bank National Association
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Adegbenga Adesokan appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismiss ing his 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.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.1998) (order). 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 Adesokan’s wrongful foreclosure, quiet title, cancellation of instruments, and fraud claims because Adesokan failed to allege facts showing tender in the amount of his indebtedness or that the foreclosure sale was void. See Arnolds Mgmt. Corp. v. Eischen, 158 Cal.App.3d 575 , 205 Cal.Rptr. 15, 17-18 (1984) (affirming dismissal of fraud claim because failure to tender bars any claims “implicitly integrated” with foreclosure); Karlsen v. Am. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 15 Cal.App.3d 112 , 92 Cal.Rptr. 851, 854 (1971) (“A valid and viable tender of payment of the indebtedness owing is essential to an action to cancel a voidable sale under a deed of trust.”); see also Cal.Civ. Code §…