Charlie Orea v. Greenpoint Mortgage Funding

MEMORANDUM

Charlie and Brenda Orea appeal pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing their action arising out of foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We í'eview de novo dismissals for failure to state a claim, Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir.2011), and on the basis of the applicable statute of limitations, Huynh v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 465 F.3d 992, 1003 (9th Cir.2006). We review for an abuse of discretion the district court’s decision whether to apply equitable tolling. Id. We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed the Oreas’ Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act (“HOEPA”) and Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RES-PA”) claims as time-barred because the Oreas did not file their action within one year of the alleged violations. See 15 U.S.C. § 1640 (e); King v. California, 784 F.2d 910, 915 (9th Cir.1986) (one-year limitations period in § 1640(e) generally runs from the date of consummation of the transaction); 12 U.S.C. § 2614 (one-year statute of limitations for violations of § 12 U.S.C. § 2607 , which prohibits kickbacks and unearned fees).

The district court did not abuse its…