You are on page 1of 16

-

'

FILED

MARK D. LONERGAN
(State Bar NO. 143622)
mdl@severson.com
THOMAS N. ABBOTT
(State Bar No. 245568)
tna@severson.com
BRIAN

SAN MATEO COUNTY


2016

S.

WHITTEMORE (State Bar No.


241631)
bsw@severson.com
SEVERSON & WERSON
A Professional Corporation

Clerk

By

One Embarcadero
Center,
San Francisco, California Suite 2600
941
Telephone: (415) 398~3344

ll

3m

Facsimile: (415) 956~0439

Attorneys for Defendants


WELLS FARGO BANK,
N
SERVICING COMPANY .A. dba AMERICAS
and U.S. BANK,
AS TRUSTEE
N.A.

SUPERIOR COURT OF
CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO


REGINA MANANTAN,
Case N0.

CIV 535902

Plaintiff,

DEFENDANTS
vs.

WELLS FARGO BANK,


AMERICAS SERVICINGN.A., D/B/A
COMPANY, U I
BANK NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION,
AS
TRUSTEE,
SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST
TO
BANK

OF AMERICA,
NATIONAL

SUCCESSOR BY MERGER
TO LASALLE
BANK, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, AS
I

REPLY IN SUPP

COMPLAINT
I

Date:
Time:

July 29, 2016


9:00 a.m.

Dept:
_

Law & Motion

Action Filed:
Trial Date:

MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST


2007-7AX,
QUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATION, MOAB,
GROUP, LLC, and DOES lINVESTMENT
through so,
Inclusive,

October 20, 2015


None Set

---cw.5,,02

ogiscr
nbiection
26

-=lllllll\\\\\\\\\lll\\l\ll\l _

55000, 1722/8168224. l

DEFENDANTS OBIECTION
AND RESPONSE TO
CIV 535902
PLAINTIFF S SUR-REPLY
IN SUPPORT OF D
TO PLAINTIFF S
EMURRER
SECOND AMENDED
C OMPLAIN T

I. INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTION TO SURREPLY

s-n

Defendants WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. dba AMERICAS SERVICING COMPANY


and U.S.

BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE (Defendants) led a demurrer to Plaintiff REGINA

MANANTANS (Plaintiff) Second Amended Complaint (SAC). This Court continued the
demurrer hearing to July 29, 2016 following an original hearing and oral argument in July 15,
2016.

In continuing the hearing, the Court did not ask the parties for additional brieng or oral
argument after the matter was submitted by all parties following oral argument. Nevertheless, in
a

procedurally improper attempt to inuence this Courts ruling, Plaintiff led a Sur-Reply related

to the demurrer which was received by Defendants on July 21, 2016. Plaintiff cites no procedural

rule allowing for a sur-reply, nor did the Court request additional brieng. Accordingly,
Defendants Object to the sur-reply this Court should disregard Plaintiffs improper sur-reply in its

ruling on the submitted demurrer.


In the event that the Court, in its discretion, considers the arguments presented in the surreply, Defendants respectfully request that the Court likewise consider the arguments contained
herein.

II. LEGAL ARGUMENT


A.

NMNNNNNNNHHP'HHHHHI-lh

Yvanova Expressly Does Not Address the Allegations Set forth in Plaintiffs Second
Amended Complaint.

oowomawm~ooo\10\m4>ww~

Paragraph 60

of Plaintiffs SAC states, in pertinent part, the following:

Despite being paid for the full balance of the mortgage loan, the original lender [acting as
the securitization sponsor and seller] as well as the interim successor lender [securitization
depositor] committed a material breach of the governing securitization agreement(s) when
these parties failed to assign the mortgage (DOT) and the underlying Original Mortgage
Note to the Trustee of the REMIC MBS Trust on or before the trusts Closing Date.
The SAC unambiguously alleges that the foreclosure sale was void because of the

closing date argument originally accepted with favor in the Glaski

v.

Bank ofAmerica ease.

(Glaski, (20l3) 218 Cal.App.4th 1079, 1094-1095.) In their brieng, Plaintiffs rely 0n the more
recent Yvanova case for the proposition that they have alleged a void sale. (Yvanova

Century Mortg. Corp. (2016) 62. Cal. 4th 919.) However,

careful reading

v.

New

of Yvanova illustrates

CIV 535902
DEFENDANTS OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF S SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER
TO PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

55000.1722/8168124.1

the Court expressly declined to determine whether Plaintiffs Closing Date theory alleges facts
M

sufficient to render

foreclosure void as Plaintiff contends in the brieng and at oral argument in

this case.
The holding in Yvanonva was purposely and expressly limited in stating that borrowers
have standing to challenge assignments as void, but not as voidable. (Yvanova, supra, 62 Ca1.4th
\toxmhw

at 939.) Specically, and crucial to the analysis in this case, Yvanova expresses no opinion as to

Plaintiffs Closing Date theory set forth in the SAC:

11

Defendants cite the decision in Rajamz'n v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust C0. (2nd
Cir.2014) 757 F.3d 79 (Rajamin ), as a rebuke of Glaski. Rajamin 's expressed
disagreement with Glaski, however, was on the question *941 whether, under New
York law, an assignment to a securitized trust made after the trust's closing date is
void 01' merely voidable. (Rajamin, at p. 90.) As explained earlier, that question is
outside the scope of our review and we express no opinion as to Glaski 's
correctness on the point.

12_

(Emphasis added.) (Yvanova, supra, 62 Ca1.4th at 940-41.) Thus, reliance on Yvanova for

10

13

the proposition that the assignment is

14',

specically states the question is outside the scope of its review.

15; B.

void

as

Plaintiff does in this

case is misplaced.

Yvanova

Saterbak Properly Holds the Assignment is Merely Voidable under Plaintiffs

Closing Date Theory

l6
Recognizing the Yvanova Couit expressly declined to determine whether the fact pattern

17

l8 presented in Plaintiffs Closing Date theory rendered

an assignment

void or merely voidable, the

19

Sarerbak Court addressed the issue. In doing so, it recognized Yvanova expressly offers no

20

opinion

21

after the trust's closing date is void or merely voidable. (Salerbak v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

22

(2016) 245 Cal.App.4th 808, 815.)

as to

whether, under New York law, an untimely assignment to

securitized trust made

follows:

23

Saterbak decides the question at issue in this case

24

We conclude such an assignment is merely voidable. (See Rajamin v. Deutsche


Bank Nat'l Trust C0. (2d Cir.2014) 757 F.3d 79, 88-89 [the weight of New York
authority is contrary to plaintiffs contention that any failure to comply with the
terms of the PSAs rendered defendants acquisition of plaintiffsl loans and
mortgages void as a matter of trust law; an unauthorized act by the trustee is not
void but merely voidable by the beneficiary].

25:
26

as

27
28

(Sarerbak, supra, 245 Cal.App.4th at 815.) Because the Court determined the assignment
CIV 535902
2
DEFENDANTS OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER
TO PLAINTIFF S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

55000.1722/8I68124.l

was merely voidable,

it concluded

defects in the MERS assignment

as

follows: Saterbak lacks standing to challenge alleged

of the DOT to the 2007-AR7 trust.

(Id. at 815.)

The Saterbak Court also rejected Plaintiffs argument that the Homeowners

Bill of Rights

(HBOR) somehow salvages Plaintiffs Closing Date theory. However, Saterbak rejects this
argument for the same reasons Defendants point to it in their brieng that the assignment was
recorded prior to the enactment

of HBOR and that it is not retroactive.

\OOQ\IO\!I-b

11'

The FAC alleges the DOT was assigned on December 27, 201 1, and recorded on
December l7, 2012. Saterbak fails to point to any provision suggesting that the
California Legislature intended the HBOR to apply retroactively. (Myers v. Philip
Morris Companies, Inc. (2002) 28 Ca1.4th 828, 841, 123 Cal.Rptr.2d 40, 50 P.3d
751 [California courts comply with the legal principle that unless there is an
express retroactivity provision, a statute will not be applied retroactively unless it
is very clear from extrinsic sources that the Legislature
must have intended a
retroactive application ].) Therefore, the HBOR does not grant Saterbak new
rights on appeal.

l2

(Saterbak, 245 Cal.App.4th at 818.)

13

Thus, HBOR does not salvage Plaintiff s theory as alleged in the brieng.

10

III. CONCLUSION

14
15

Based on the foregoing, this Court should properly conclude that Plaintiff lacks standing to
.

16

challenge the assignment as it is voidable, not void, under the Closing Date theory set forth in

l7 the SAC. The Court should likewise conclude that the HBOR does not salvage this theory,
18

19

following the reasoning in Saterbak.


Defendant respectfully submits that Plaintiffs unsolicited and procedurally improper sur-

20

reply is properly disregarded by the Court. However, in the event the Court does consider the

21

brieng, the Court should also consider the arguments herein as a matter of fairness.

22

DATED: July 25, 2016

23

SEVERSON & WERSON


A Professional corporation

By:

7'):

Brian __S_."4<_I;/l_iittemore

24

25

Attorneys for Defendants WELLS FARGO BANK,


N.A. dba AMERICAS SERVICING COMPANY and
U.S. BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE

26'
27'
28

CIV 535902
3
DEFENDANTS OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER
TO PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

55000.1722/8168l24.l

PROOF 0F SERVICE
Regina Manantan v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al.
San Mateo County Superior Court Case No. CIV 535902

At the time of service, I was over 18 years 0f age and not a party to this action. I am
employed in the County of San Francisco, State 0f California. My business address is One
Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600, San Francisco, CA 94111.
On July 25, 2016,

I served true copies of the following document(s):

\ogmnosw-e-wmx

DEFENDANTS OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS SUR-REPLY


IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED
COMPLAINT
on the interested parties in this action as follows:
I

Timothy L. McCandless, Esq.


Law Offices of Timothy McCandless
26875 Calle Hermosa, Suite A
Capistrano Beach, CA 92624

r-i

Attorneys for Plaintiff Regina Manantan


Telephone: (925) 957-9797
Facsimile: (925) 957-9799
E-Mail: legal@prodefenders.com

r*

i-

Joanna Kozubal, Esq.


375 Potrero Avenue, #5
San Francisco, CA 94103

Attorneys for Defendant Moab Investment


Group, LLC
Telephone: (415) 864-6962
Facsimile: (650) 636-9791

Nancy Lee, Esq.


McCarthy & Holthus, LLP
1770 4th Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101

Attorneys for Defendant Quality Loan Service


Corporation
Telephone: (619) 685-4800
Email: nll@mccarthyholthus.com

~-

,_..

,_.

'--

,_.

''

[Q

BY FEDEX: I enclosed said document(s) in an envelope or package provided by FedEx


and addressed to the persons at the addresses listed in the Service List. 1 placed the envelope or
package for collection and overnight delivery at an ofce or a regularly utilized drop box of FedEx
or delivered such document(s) to a courier or driver authorized by FedEx to receive documents.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on July 25, 2016, at San Francisco, California.


\J

can.
(Cam
v

[\J

'

ChilarehQ, Kada

N
N
N
N
N

CIV 535902
DEFENDANTS OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER
TO PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

55000.1722/8168124.1

Page

w:
W

I;
W
E
m.
N
z.
_g;

m,
ago
| ggagg
cn N
E

a>c;"' swim?
E
,WWW
~_~
E s-Uqgggggwgq
o We...
... u.
W
eq>0915=l

a'

6,

g;

m
wo
m
WE
m'
;%g
=
m1
x;
WE
W
m
;W
g
m
m
'3.
.

N
s

____________

,-

=>

w
-

____~_."

--'"

'-'

.-;
.1--.

________----;:
H

_=_

_-

e
3%:
___

_,____

=:-=-

_"

_4

O c:

9
(I:
m

e9

N
52$

>a

=2

r31

1
o
<
g
E
g
_l

m
I'I'l

>
an

""

__:

-._-__-:'...'-............-"'-

o; Gama

_=-

-:_=_'__-
-..-~-__.__..__1>

_A

l of 2

W;

__

'5 g u>
gm
E
_ 3 gg

,WEE

cl_
_t
c

g
>

>
|

5?,

@(g

_<

,-

m
[$559

c gag
wgt
1g 0%p
\

eggs
10%
'l'l o
>
5'z
3,

ITI
23

>

j;

q;

g;
g;

:c a,
< m

g
O
2
c:

E
(n
(n

g8?

rm

3%?

are
Elsa

55;
w
3
Q

a
9,;

.nmmmoiuv

544.115CBDA4E8

After printing this label:


1.

Use the Print' button on this page to print your label to your laser or inkjet printer.

2. Fold the printed page along the horizontal line.


3. Place label in shipping pouch and afx it to your shipment so that the barcode portion

of the label can be read and scanned.

Warning: Use only the printed original label for shipping. Using a photocopy of this label for shipping purposes is fraudulent and could
result in additional billing charges. along with the cancellation of your FedEx account number.
Use of this system constitutes your agreement to the service conditions in the current FedEx Service Guide. available on fedex.com.FedEx
will not be responsible for any claim in excess of $100 per package, whether the result of loss. damage. delay. non-delivery.misdelivery.or
misinformation, unless you declare a higher value, pay an additional charge, document your actual loss and le a timely claim.Limitations
found in the current FedEx Service Guide apply. Your right to recover from FedEx for any loss, including intrinsic value of the package, loss
of sales. income interest, profit. attorney's fees. costs, and other forms of damage whether direct. incidental.consequential. or special is
limited to the greater of $100 or the authorized declared value. Recovery cannot exceed actual documented lossMaximum for items of
extraordinary value is $1.000. e.g. jewelry. precious metals, negotiable instruments and other items listed in our ServiceGuide. Written
claims must be filed within strict time limits. see current FedEx Service Guide.

https://www.fedex.com/shipping/html/enf/PrintIFrame.html

7/25/2016

Page.

m
.m
Q_
WM

9W >
>

---~'-'-""'"'"".._..__

__._--.___---;-__:

-Im

._____.___.______________

3'

-------------

'e
~80) a 3
a.
>
cZ
'0

I
N

.mc
_
-"_~
-

_._

.
1

-@W E

WE5

m
1%

a
o -I
c
g
m

g9

-r| o

Ow

_,..-_~

.-

'3;

O _
I'I'I l"'

"

3U

El

as as

00933 mews

was;

.5

vadaomiaiao

VNNVOl

cosiowua

ai>

33""

23

DU

>
<

:osaov

NO"

tile
"IVEHZOM

'OSEI

3
Q

1-,")

auc

._

~53 =2;

-....._--:..._.-.._....i

,__,_'-'-'_,____::_-

9|

:2

ns
031mg

satvts

g
o
o
O

>

01

8-11

i of? 1'2

TIIH

dIHS

IGVO
319M10V,

331W]
tEiClNElS

001
OGLSENVSQBSSQE

81

slinrsz

u
c
>

.1

.
g

humanism

9-

StilfSCBD/MEB

After printing this label:


1.

Use the 'Print button on this page to print your label to your laser or inkjet printer.

2. Fold the printed page along the horizontal line.


3. Place label in shipping pouch and affix it to your shipment so that the barcode portion of the label can be read and scanned.

Warning: Use only the printed original label for shipping. Using a photocopy of this label for shipping purposes is fraudulent and could
result in additional billing charges, along with the cancellation of your FedEx account number.
Use of this system constitutes your agreement to the service conditions in the current FedEx Service Guide, available on fedex.com.FedEx
will not be responsible for any claim in excess of $100 per package, whether the result of loss, damage, delay, non-delivery,misdeiivery,or
misinformation, unless you declare a higher value, pay an additional charge, document your actual loss and file a timely claim.Limitations
found In the current FedEx Service Guide apply. Your right to recover from FedEx for any loss, Including intrinsic value of the package, loss
of sales, income interest, profit, attorney's fees, costs, and other forms of damage whether direct, incidental,consequential, or special is
limited to the greater of $100 or the authorized declared value. Recovery cannot exceed actual documented loss.Maximum for items of
extraordinary value is $1,000, e.g. jewelry, precious metals, negotiable instruments and other items listed in our ServiceGuide. Written
claims must be filed within strict time limits, see current FedEx Service Guide.

https://www.fedcx.com/shipping/html/enf/PrintIFrame.html

7/25/2016

Pgicil

oil

.;__
,mw

M
m
M
U
m
m>---_-_

_..___._...___.,--------

w
_m

pgm
a,
>

gig
,

>

QU
=5

g
w

>

(A)

ad

3%?5EE

_.__.____.________
.__
_|-

5m
______----

_'

E'

Z-e

=-

-_~

a s

0 comet/mo
555%
-'~
Z
""15" g 531
2
O > nw$~
I1 > O 3% 790 Q'-< :wg 519?
xi Io |
,gmr-sru

I
I g

I> II
I
"
c:U

4:5

"0
90111 z
lTI

U)

r<n

3
c

>

"'

as

'

21$
Dani

<

g;

\l

I'-

I-

4_

---

co

a:

gm;

55;a:
a

..

.immummv

After printing this label:

e
5

_'

n-

,
'

a
-

544J1E>CBDI14E8

1. Use the 'Print button on this page to

print your label to your laser or inkjet printer.


2. Fold the printed page along the horizontal line.
3. Place label in shipping pouch and afx it to your shipment so that the barcode portion of the label can be read and scanned.
'

Warning: Use only the printed original label for shipping. Using a photocopy of this label for shipping purposes is fraudulent and could
result in additional billing charges, along with the cancellation of your FedEx account number.
Use of thls system constitutes your agreement to the service conditions in the current FedEx Service Guide, available on fedex.com.FedEx
will not be responsible for any claim in excess of $100 per package, whether the result of loss, damage, delay, non-delivery,misdelivery,or
misinformation. unless you declare a higher value, pay an additional charge, document your actual loss and file a timely claim.Limitations
found in the current FedEx Service Guide apply. Your right to recover from FedEx for any loss, including intrinsic value of the package. loss
of sales, income interest, prot, attorney's fees, costs, and other forms of damage whether direct, incidental,consequential, or special is
limited to the greater of $100 or the authorized declared value. Recovery cannot exceed actual documented Ioss.Maximum for items of
extraordinary value is $1,000, e.g. jewelry, precious metals, negotiable instruments and other items listed in our ServiceGuide. Written
claims must be filed within strict time limits, see current FedEx Service Guide.

https://www.fedex.com/shipping/html/enPrintIFrame.htmi

7/25/2016

MARK D. LONERGAN (State Bar No. 143622)


Y

1ndl@severson.com

THOMAS N. ABBOTT (State Bar N0. 245568)


tna@severson.com

BRIAN S. WHITTEMORE (State Bar No. 241631)


bsw@severson.com
SEVERSON & WERSON
A Professional Corporation
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600
San Francisco, California 9411 1
Telephone: (415) 398-3344
Facsimile: (415) 956-0439

\14_o\

Attorneys for Defendants


WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. dba AMERICAS
SERVICING COMPANY and U.S. BANK, NA.
AS TRUSTEE

\o_oo

10

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA


11

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO


12
13
;

REGINA MANANTAN,

Case No.

CIV 535902

14-

DEFENDANTS OBJECTION AND


RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS SURREPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER
TO PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED

Plaintiff,
15

vs.

l6
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., D/B/A
AMERICAS SERVICING COMPANY, U.S.
BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS

COMPLAINT

17
18

TRUSTEE, SUCCESSOR-TN-INTEREST TO

Time:
Dept.:

BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL


19

ASSOCIATION AS TRUSTEE,
SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO LASALLE
BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS
TRUSTEE FOR MORGAN STANLEY
MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2007-7AX,
QUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATION, MOAB, INVESTMENT
GROUP, LLC, and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive,

Date:

July 29, 2016


9:00 a.m.
Law & Motion

20
5

21
1

22
23

Action Filed:
Trial Date:

October 20, 2015


None Set

Defendants.

24
25

26,
27
28
CIV 535902
DEFENDANTS OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER
TO PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

55000,]722/81681241

I. INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTION TO SURREPLY


Defendants WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. dba AMERICAS SERVICING COMPANY
and U.S.

BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE (Defendants) led a demurrer to Plaintiff REGINA

MANANTANs (Plaintiff) Second Amended Complaint (SAC). This Court continued the
demurrer hearing to July 29, 2016 following an original hearing and oral argument in July 15,
2016.

In continuing the hearing, the Court did not ask the parties for additional brieng or oral
argument after the matter was submitted by all parties following oral argument. Nevertheless, in
a

procedurally improper attempt to inuence this Courts ruling, Plaintiff led a Sur-Reply related

to the demurrer which was received by Defendants on July 21, 2016. Plaintiff cites no procedural

rule allowing for a sur-reply, nor did the Court request additional brieng. Accordingly,
Defendants Object to the sur-reply this Court should disregard Plaintiffs improper sur-reply in its

ruling on the submitted demurrer.


In the event that the Court, in its discretion, considers the arguments presented in the sur-

'

reply, Defendants respectfully request that the Court likewise consider the arguments contained
herein.

II. LEGAL ARGUMENT


A.

Yvanova Expressly Docs Not Address the Allegations Set forth


Amended Complaint.

Paragraph 60

of Plaintiffs SAC

states, in pertinent part, the

1n

Plaintiffs

Second

following:

Despite being paid fol the full balance of the mortgage loan, the original lender [acting as
the securitization sponsor and seller] as well as the interim successor lender [securitization
depositor] committed a material bieach of the governing securitization agreement(s) when
these parties failed to assign the mortgage (DOT) and the underlying Original Mortgage
Note to the Trustee of the REMIC MBS Trust on or before the trust s Closing Date.
The SAC unambiguously alleges that the foreclosure sale was void because of the

closing date argument originally accepted with favor in the Glaski

v.

Bank ofAmerica case.

(Glaski, (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 1079, 1094-1095.) In their brieng, Plaintiff s rely on the more
recent Yvanova case for the proposition .that they have alleged a void sale. (Yvanova

v.

New

Century Mortg. Corp. (2016) 62. Cal. 4th 919.) However, a careful reading of Yvanova illustrates
CIV 535902.
M
DEFENDANTS OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAIN IIFFS SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER
TO PLAINTIFF S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

550001722/81681241

the Court expressly declined to determine whether

sufcient to render

Plaintiffs Closing Date theory alleges facts

foreclosure void as Plaintiff contends in the brieng and at oral argument in


P

ALAN

this case.
The holding in Yvanonva was purposely and expressly limited in stating that borrowers
have standing to challenge assignments as void, but not as voidable. (Yvanova, supra, 62 Cal.4th

\10\UI

at 939.) Specically, and crucial to the analysis in this case, Yvanova expresses no opinion as to

Plaintiffs Closing Date theory set forth in the SAC:

ll

Defendants cite the decision in Rajamin v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust C0. (2nd
Cir.2014) 757 F.3d 79 (Rajamin ), as a rebuke of Glaski. Rajamin 's expressed
disagreement with Glaski, however, was on the question *941 whether, under New
York law, an assignment to a securitized trust made after the trust's closing date is
void or merely voidable. (Rajamin, at p. 90.) As explained earlier, that question is
outside the scope of our review and we express no opinion as to Glaski 's
correctness on the point.

12

(Emphasis added.) (Yvanova, supra, 62 Cal.4th at 940411.) Thus, reliance on Yvanova for

10

13

the proposition that the assignment is void as Plaintiff does in this case is misplaced.

Yvanova

l4 specifically states the question is outside the scope of its review.


15

Saterbak Properly Holds the Assignment is Merely Voidable under Plaintiffs

B.

Closing Date Theory


16

l7

Recognizing the Yvanova Court expressly declined to determine whether the fact pattern

Plaintiffs Closing Date theory rendered

18

presented in

19

Saterbak Court addressed the issue. In doing so, it recognized Yvanova expressly offers no

20

opinion

21

after the trust's closing date is void or merely voidable. (Salerbak v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA.

as to whether,

an assignment void or merely voidable, the

under New York law, an untimely assignment to a securitized trust made

22 (2016) 245 Cal.App.4th 808, 815.)


23

Saterbak decides the question at issue in this case

24

We conclude such an assignment is merely voidable. (See Rajamin v. Deutsche


Bank Nat'l Trust C0. (2d Cir.2014) 757 F.3d 79, 88-89 [the weight of New York
authority is contrary to plaintiffs contention that any failure to comply with the
terms of the PSAs rendered defendants acquisition of plaintiffs loans and
mortgages void as a matter of trust law; an unauthorized act by the trustee is not
void but merely voidable by the beneciary].

25

26

as

follows:

27
28

(Saterbak, supra, 245 Cal.App.4th at 815.) Because the Court determined the assignment
CIV 535902
2
DEFENDANTS OBJECTION'AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OFDEMURRER
TO PLAINTIFF S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

55000.1722/8168124.1
'

was merely voidable,

it concluded as follows: Saterbak lacks standing to challenge alleged

defects in the MERS assignment

of the DOT to the 2007-AR7 trust.

(1d. at

815.)

The Saterbak Court also rejected Plaintiffs argument that the Homeowners

Bill of Rights

(HBOR) somehow salvages Plaintiffs Closing Date theory. However, Saterbak rejects this
argument for the same reasons Defendants point to
recorded prior to the enactment

it in their brieng that the assignment was

of HBOR and that it is not retroactive.

The FAC alleges the DOT was assigned on December 27, 2011, and recorded on
December 17, 2012. Saterbak fails to point to any provision suggesting that the
California Legislature intended the HBOR to apply retroactively. (Myers v. Philip
Morris Companies, Inc. (2002) 28 Cal.4th 828, 841, 123 Cal.Rptr.2d 40, 50 P.3d
751 [California courts comply with the legal principle that unless there is an
express retroactivity provision, a statute will not be applied retroactively unless it
is very clear from extrinsic sources that the Legislature
must have intended a
retroactive application ].) Therefore, the HBOR does not grant Saterbak new
rights on appeal.
(Saterbak, 245 Ca1.App.4th at 818.)

Thus, HBOR does not salvage Plaintiffs theory as alleged in the briefing.

III. CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, this Court should properly conclude that Plaintiff lacks standing to
J

challenge the assignment as

it is voidable, not void, under the Closing Date theory set forth in

the SAC. The Court should likewise conclude that the HBOR does not salvage this theory,

following the reasoning in Salerbak.


Defendant respectfully submits that Plaintiffs unsolicited and procedurally improper sur-

reply is properly disregarded by the Court. However, in the event the Court does consider the

brieng, the Court should also consider the arguments herein

DATED: July 25, 2016

as a

matter of fairness.

SEVERSON & WERSON


A Professional Corporation
Byr

$1.,

>

Brian S.,'Whittemore

Attorneys for Defendants WELLS FARGO BANK,


N.A. dba AMERICAS SERVICING COMPANY and
U.S. BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE

CIV 535902
3
DEFENDANTS OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER
TO PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

55000.1722/8l68124J

PROOF OF SERVICE
Regina Manantan v; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et a].
San Mateo County Superior Court Case No. CIV 535902

,_i

At the time of service, I was over 18 years of age and not a party to this action. I am
employed in the County of San Francisco, State of California. My business address is One
Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600, San Francisco, CA 94111.
On July 25, 2016,

I served true copies of the following document(s):

DEFENDANTS OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS SUR-REPLY


IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED

\owooqosgn-bww

COMPLAINT
on the interested parties in this action as follows:

Timothy L. McCandless, Esq.


Law Ofccs of Timothy McCandless
26875 Calle Hermosa, Suite A
Capistrano Beach, CA 92624

wwwlowwwww-_f._.,_-._H~._._

Attorneys for Plaintiff Regina Manantan


Telephone: (925) 957-9797
Facsimile: (925) 957-9799
E-Mail: legal@prodefenders.com

Joanna Kozubal, Esq.


375 Potrero Avenue, #5
San Francisco, CA 94103

Attorneys for Defendant Moab Investment


Group, LLC
Telephone: (415) 864-6962
Facsimile: (650) 636-9791

Nancy Lee, Esq.


McCarthy & Holthus, LLP
1770 4th Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101

Attorneys for Defendant Quality Loan Service


Corporation
Telephone: (619) 685-4800
Email: nll@mccarthyholthus.com

BY FEDEX: I enclosed said document(s) in an envelope or package provided by FedEx


and addressed to the persons at the addresses listed in the Service List. I placed the envelope or
package for collection and overnight delivery at an ofce or a regularly utilized drop box of FedEx
or delivered such document(s) to a courier or driver authorized by FedEx to receive documents.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on July 25, 2016, at San Francisco, California.

Mina,
[62M
V
ChilarenQ. Kada

CIV 535902
DEFENDANTS OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER
TO PLAINTIFF S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

55000.1722/8168124.1

Pass

m
mM
m<

__
WEE
,

I;
ca

__""___.___~~

--_-___-_-.

g
2

--.

:u m

~-*_.

a
0

>
.-,
rm,

(I,

7U

5%.

I. ' - H;

,--____--_-_

em m

%__

"1

_._.

__,.

______________________

'JQ"

.5

53'

=-_...-___-.____'_-Z

gm,
,m
.m

O- cibmb
E FA
9'30
a ggig
w ~
=
E 0>CO>;QEE%_Z
u _ a: E g 358306-

WE
~
__

g;

_
._
'-_
- ___-l-.._ _ -

aw. a

g
a I. 2

as Ozm's
:1,

@1115,-

'
-=~

u.

8OE
>:r:"'l

ITI

(n

ll-

zU

1~

[IQ

o2

_-\

__

1.

sU
g

s2>

all?

0b;
gauZr-

5m;
a
Q

>

'
~

'
.

.nsmsumm

544.11

5080/14E8

After printing this label:


1. Use the

Print button on this page to print your label to your laser or inkjet printer.

2. Fold the printed page along the horizontal line.


3. Place label in shipping pouch and afx it to your shipment so that the barcode portion

of the label can be read and scanned.

Warning: Use only the printed original label for shipping. Using a photocopy of this label for shipping purposes is fraudulent and could
result in additional billing charges, along with the cancellation of your FedEx account number.
Use of this system constitutes your agreement to the service conditions in the current FedEx Service Guide, available on fedex.com.FedEx
will not be responsible for any claim in excess of $100 per package, whether the result of loss, damage, delay, non-delivery,misdelivery,or
misinformation, unless you declare a higher value, pay an additional charge, document your actual loss and file a timely claim.Limitations
found in the current FedEx Service Guide apply. Your right to recover from FedEx for any loss, including intrinsic value of the package, loss
of sales, income interest, prot, attorney's fees, costs, and other forms of damage whether direct, incidental,consequential, or special is
limited to the greater of $100 or the authorized declared value. Recovery cannot exceed actual documented toss.Maximum for items of
extraordinary value is $1.000, e.g. jewelry, precious metals, negotiable instruments and other items listed in our ServiceGuide. Written
claims must be filed within strict time limits, see current FedEx Service Guide.

https ://www.fedex.com/shipping/html/en/fPrintIFrame.html

7/25/20 i 6

Pagel

m
m,
w>

.,

"

_______________-_--

lit

-------=_______

M__-
------~

m
.W

8
w
0|
u
N

__......._...._..__.___...

_-,
.__..'__...__'
_'_.

1"

"

m:

5%?5
33.923072.o
MES, 8 a
>
Z @9225?

rn

as

,U

egg
0- as
g ll-*3;

>

to

Q
O
O

1:

n
>
<0
e
g
g8

z
C

ale

pg;

3
g

m
m
_

O C

m
_

770).,

a
g

800

a)

zr-E

C
I-

I11

W30

an

>

~-

1:

<:

(O

E _

o 3w

Q '8

11

o cumuoamo
@-

'u

E
E
-_._I -_, E
E
7?- =
E
E
E

1%
w

= s'

___

O
(n

"'_~

'

__

m1
'.__-__-
My >
,m
W,
I
.___.
m'
m1

E oc~
ew
19> m I
E 5w
g2 O

WE
:m

I
1

l---_-_--_-_________PC_

%
W?
WE

QE

cit-2i

55

>

3:15
m?

..

JiiliiTlIMilv

544J15CBDIME8

After printing this label:


1.

Use the 'Print button on this page to print your label to your laser or inkjet printer.

2. Fold the printed page along the horizontal line.


3. Place label in shipping pouch and afx it lo your

shipment so that the barcode portion of the label can be read and scanned.

Warning: Use only the printed original label for shipping. Using a photocopy of this label for shipping purposes is fraudulent and could
result in additional billing charges, along with the cancellation of your FedEx account number.
Use of this system constitutes your agreement to the service conditions in the current FedEx Service Guide, available on fedex.com.FedEx
will not be responsible for any claim in excess of $100 per package, whether the result of loss, damage, delay, non-delivery,misdelivery,or
misinformation, unless you declare a higher value, pay an additional charge, document your actual loss and file a timely claim.Limitations
found In the current FedEx Service Guide apply. Your right to recover from FedEx for any loss, Including intrinsic value of the package, loss
of sales, income interest, prot, attorney's fees, costs, and other forms of damage whether direct, incidental,consequential, or special is
limited to the greater of $100 or the authorized declared value. Recovery cannot exceed actual documented lossMaxlmum for items of
extraordinary value is $1,000, e.g. jewelry, precious metals, negotiable instruments and other items listed in our ServiceGuide. Written
claims must be filed within strict time limits, see current FedEx Service Guide.

https://www.fedex.com/shipping/html/cnf/PrintIFramc.html

7/25/2016

Page

-=
w
m
I

_-'

_-_n
------

}?
R

m
_
m
>
m
M
m
:M

----_____._

-----".._......._..__..._""'""

__-

________________.__._.__._.__.._

;_---'"__.___
__......_._._..."""'"'-""'-'-

~r~
E
E
saga,
V
=
=
= e>
g s89z
.=
E
m

>3-\Z

a,

a
8

=
=
-_

w
w
O5

"'
___

'

6
I_
o
g
g
-r

wag
_

"

a
"1

21%.. _._

_-:E'_=i

W
_

A
ES

__

'1"!

"i
O

_.

a
11

O
:U

_|

cmmomwc

.108

-<_i11

rA
..

E5...

> 08%
02;t

2
g,

,1:-

.02}?

g
a.

:C:

'o

g
z0

___

of 2

Z ease;~
g
"\m
o
~ wE
>
o
3'
wge
s:
z
o
o was...
,,
I -< ~atn 0930

> (I)
'
g r;

gs
3-1?

gin]
25E
g

g
>

g
,

mum.

if,"

544nsceonaee

After printing thls label:


1. Use the 'Print button on this page to print your label to your laser or inkjet printer.
2. Fold the printed page along the horizontal line.
3. Place label in shipping pouch and afx it to your shipment so that the barcode portion of the label can be read and scanned.

Warning: Use only the printed original label for shipping. Using a photocopy of this label for shipping purposes is fraudulent and could
result in additional billing charges. along with the cancellation of your FedEx account number.
Use of this system constitutes your agreement to the service conditions in the current FedEx Service Guide. available on fedex.com.FedEx
will not be responsible for any claim in excess of $100 per package, whether the result of loss, damage. delay. non-delivery.misdelivery.or
misinformation. unless you declare a higher value, pay an additional charge. document your actual loss and tile a timely claim.Limitations
found in the current FedEx Service Guide apply. Your right to recover from FedEx for any loss. including intrinsic value of the package. loss
of sales. income interest, prot. attorney's fees. costs. and other forms of damage whether direct. incidental,consequential. or special is
limited to the greater of $100 or the authorized declared value. Recovery cannot exceed actual documented loss.Maximum for items of
extraordinary value is $1.000. e.g. jewelry. precious metals. negotiable instruments and other items listed in our ServiceGuide. Written
claims must be led within strict time limits. see current FedEx Service Guide.

https://www.fedex.com/shipping/html/enl/PrintiFramehtml

7/25/2016

You might also like