Eric Skinner v. Deutsche Bank National Trust C

MEMORANDUM

Eric J. Skinner appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his action arising from foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir.2011). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record, Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th Cir.2008), and we affirm.

Dismissal of Skinner’s claim for “erroneous representation as to standing to foreclose” was proper because his allegations did not “plausibly suggest an entitlement to relief.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 681 , 129 S.Ct. 1937 , 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009); see also Zadrozny v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 720 F.3d 1163, 1171 (9th Cir.2013) (“Arizona law recognizes a successor trustee’s authority to initiate and conduct a foreclosure sale after the borrowers’ default, without any requirement that the beneficiary demonstrate possession of the note underlying the deed of trust.”); Hogan v. Washington Mut. Bank, N.A., 230 Ariz. 584 , 277 P.3d 781, 782 (2012) (en banc) (“Arizona’s non judicial foreclosure statutes do not require the beneficiary to prove its authority or ‘show the note’ before…