Schramm v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.

MEMORANDUM

Barbara Schramm and Steven Weinstein (collectively, “Schramm”) appeal from the district court’s entry of judgment in favor of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“Chase”) following a bench trial on Schramm’s class action claim under the California Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”), Cal. Bus. & Prof, Code §. 17200. We have jurisdiction under 28 Ú.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm the judgment of the district court.

On appeal, Schramm argues that Chase’s mortgage disclosures were “unlawful” for purposes of the UCL because they failed to comport with the Federal Reserve Board’s Staff Interpretation of Regulation Z, which the Federal Reserve Board promulgated to implement the Truth 'in Lending Act (“TILA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601 -1667f. This argument was waived, as Schramm never clearly made it before the district court. See In re E.R. Fegert, Inc., 887 F.2d 955, 957 (9th Cir. 1989). While “[a]n argument is typically elaborated more articulately, with more' extensive authorities, on appeal than in the less focused and frequently more time pressured environment of the trial court,” Puerta v. United States, 121 F.3d 1338, 1341-42 (9th Cir. 1997), Schramm’s reliance on the staff interpretation is…