Haynish

Haynish v. Bank of Am., N.A.

Good Law
284 F. Supp. 3d 1037
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 9, 2018Case No. 17–cv–01011–HRLCalifornia6,542 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Lloyd, J.

Theodore Haynish, Jr. and Jacqueline Haynish ("the Haynishes") sue Bank of America, N.A. ("Bank of America"), Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. ("SPS"), and The Bank of New York Mellon f/k/a The Bank of New York as Trustee for the Certificateholders of the CWABS, Inc., Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2005-3 ("Bank of New York"). The Haynishes assert four claims related to the foreclosure of their former home.

All three defendants move to dismiss the Haynishes' first amended complaint ("FAC") for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Dkt. Nos. 27, 29. All defendants also request that the Court take judicial notice of various documents. Dkt. Nos. 28, 31. Additionally, SPS and Bank of New York move to strike portions of the FAC under Rule 12(f). Dkt. No. 30. For the reasons explained below, the Court grants the motions to dismiss in part and denies them in part, grants the requests for judicial notice, and denies the motion to strike.

All parties consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction. Dkt. Nos. 9, 13, 18.

*1043 I. BACKGROUND

A. Factual Allegations

The Haynishes allege the following facts, which the Court must accept as true. The Haynishes owned and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.