MARK D. LONERGAN (State Bar NO. 143622) - mdl@severson.com '

THOMAS N. ABBOTT (State Bar No. 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 941 ll Telephone: (415) 398~3344 Facsimile: (415) 956~0439

Attorneys for Defendants WELLS FARGO BANK, N .A. dba AMERICA’S SERVICING COMPANY and U.S. BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

REGINA MANANTAN,

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., D/B/A COMPLAINT AMERICA’S SERVICING COMPANY, U

SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO LASALLE _ Action Filed: BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS Trial Date:

I MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2007-7AX, , QUALITY LOAN SERVICE

CORPORATION, MOAB, INVESTMENT_

GROUP, LLC, and DOES l through so, ---cw.5,,§02

Y Inclusive, ‘

ogiscr nbiection 26

55000, 1722/8168224. l

FILED SAN MATEO COUNTY

2016

Clerk u f‘ C I‘ By 5“

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

Case N0. CIV 535902 Plaintiff,

DEFENDANTS’ vs.

REPLY IN SUPP

BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS I . I

Date: July 29, 2016 TRUSTEE, SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST TO Time: 9:00 a.m. BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL Dept: Law & Motion

£3m

October 20, 2015 None Set

DEFENDANTS‘ OBIECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF ’S SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF D TO PLAINTIFF ’S SECOND AMENDED C

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

CIV 535902

EMURRER OMPLAINT

NMNNNNNNNHHP'HHHHHI-lh‘

oowomawm~o©oo\10\m4>ww~

s-n I. INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTION TO SURREPLY

Defendants WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. dba AMERICA’S SERVICING COMPANY

and U.S. BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE (“Defendants”) filed a demurrer to Plaintiff REGINA

MANANTAN’S (“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 briefing or oral

argument after the matter was submitted by all parties following oral argument. Nevertheless, in

a procedurally improper attempt to influence this Court’s ruling, Plaintiff filed 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 briefing. 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 Does Not Address the Allegations Set forth in Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint.

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 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 of America ease.

(Glaski, (20l3) 218 Cal.App.4th 1079, 1094-1095.) In their briefing, Plaintiffs rely 0n 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 55000.1722/8168124.1 CIV 535902

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

M

\toxmhw

10

11

12_

13‘

14',

15;

l6

17

l8

19

20

21

22

23

24

25:

26

27

28

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

sufficient to render a foreclosure void as Plaintiff contends in the briefing 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. (Y vanova, supra, 62 Ca1.4th

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

Plaintiffs “Closing Date” theory set forth in the SAC:

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.

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

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

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

B. Saterbak Properly Holds the Assignment is Merely Voidable under Plaintiffs “Closing Date” Theory

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

presented in Plaintiffs “Closing Date” theory rendered an assignment void or merely voidable, the

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

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

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

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

Saterbak decides the question at issue in this case as follows:

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”].

(Sarerbak, supra, 245 Cal.App.4th at 815.) Because the Court determined the assignment 55000.1722/8I68124.l 2 CIV 535902

DEFENDANTS’ OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF ‘S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

\OOQ\IO\£!I-b

10

11'

l2

13

14

15

16

l7

18

19

20

21

22

. 23

24

25‘

26'

27'

28

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.” (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 briefing — that the assignment was

recorded prior to the enactment of HBOR and that it is not retroactive.

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.

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

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

III. CONCLUSION

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

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 Saterbak.

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

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

DATED: July 25, 2016 - SEVERSON & WERSON A Professional corporation By:

‘ A‘ 7'): ‘ g

Brian __S_."4‘<_I;/l_iittemore

Attorneys for Defendants WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. dba AMERICA’S SERVICING COMPANY and U.S. BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE

55000.1722/8168l24.l 3 CIV 535902

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

N

N

N

N

N

[\J

‘\J

N

[Q

'—'

,_.

'--

,_.

,_..

~—-

i—-

-‘

r—*

r-i

H

\ogmnosw-e-wmx

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):

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

on the interested parties in this action as follows:

Timothy L. McCandless, Esq. I

Attorneys for Plaintiff Regina Manantan Law Offices of Timothy McCandless

;

Telephone: (925) 957-9797 26875 Calle Hermosa, Suite A Facsimile: (925) 957-9799 Capistrano Beach, CA 92624 - E-Mail: legal@prodefenders.com

Joanna Kozubal, Esq. Attorneys for Defendant Moab Investment 375 Potrero Avenue, #5 Group, LLC San Francisco, CA 94103 Telephone: (415) 864-6962

Facsimile: (650) 636-9791

Nancy Lee, Esq. Attorneys for Defendant Quality Loan Service McCarthy & Holthus, LLP Corporation 1770 4th Avenue Telephone: (619) 685-4800 San Diego, CA 92101 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. 1 placed the envelope or

l package for collection and overnight delivery at an office or a regularly utilized drop box of FedEx 5 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.

can. (Cam v ChilarehQ, Kada

I '

55000.1722/8168124.1 CIV 535902 ,

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

t a

Page l of 2

a ‘w: _A o; Gama m, E I; W E ago cn N —| éggafigg W’ .

‘ E a>c°‘;"' swim”? m. N , ~_ E s-Uqgéggggwgq ____________‘ N s WWW ~ _=- W ... u. o We... z. 3 a _ _=_ eq>0915=l @(g [$559 “_- _ E > ‘n _< c ‘\ m g‘; w '

_- _

§ |— — ,- wgt gag m o ‘6,’ g; , __: g Q 5?, - 1g 0%p w- => ,- ‘___ e m 10% eggs

_——__——_~_.—" w ‘

_,____ 3%: I'I'l ITI 'l'l o q; ~

g; m -‘ WE > 23 j > g; —-——-'" 8 "" z an 5'- ; z 3, m' ;%g u> > :c a, -._-—__-:'...'-............-"'- ~

_

'5 g gm ‘< m = =:-=-— W; __ E 3 g g . , ‘m1 _"’ _ T x; E _4 WE g O g g8? -:_=_—'__-——‘ O c: ,WEE 2 rm“ ‘3%? -—..—-~——-—- __.__..__1> =2 r31 W c: a are m 1 ~ ;W E § Elsa x '-' 9 o Z’ g (n 55; .——-——; (I: < c m (n w 3 .1——-———-———. m g l_ 3 m e9 _t Q '3. N E c ’________--—-—-;: 52$ g g a H . . _ > a _l > 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 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.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, 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

a 'e . > é ~80) a 3 ---———~'-'-""'"'"".._..__ §> a. 9W ‘I c“Z __._--.___---;-_—_: > N 8-11

'0 m c» ~ 9| m °° g 23 ‘.m w o DU Q_ w o > WM O < ._____.___.______________ > ~

1

. _._ ai> g -——-----------——- -@W ~53 =2; E ._ 3 -....._--—:.—.._.-—.._....—i WE E Q“ - a -I _,..-_~‘ . 1-,") 5 3' o c m I :2 '3; .-

"“ - ,__,_'-'-'—_,____::_-—‘ g O ‘_ 1% -—"_~ - - m I'I'I l"' .mc g9 3U ~ m -r| u —_ o c

~ O w El > g

. .1

. humanism 9- StéilfSCBD/MEB

'OSEI

"IVEHZOM

VNNVOl‘

01

Page. i‘ of? 1'2‘

satvts

031mg

00933

ns

mews

auc

was;

as

.5

as

vadaomiaiao

cosiowua

S NO"

:osaov

33""

tile

tEiClNElS

TIIH

OGLSENVSQBSSQE

IGVO

81

001

319M10V,

slinrsz

331W]

dIHS

~

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

a a

Pégicil oil

_'.

o n-“ 0 comet/mo gig pégm -'~ g Z 555% 531 >---_-—_ ,

> a, ‘I ""15" g 2 .;__ °°> ‘I O > n£w$¢~ ,mw I ‘I QU ‘I1 > O 3% 7°90 Q'-

_..___._...___.,--—-—----- g ‘=5 o xi -< :wg £519? ‘M c —| I- 4:5‘ ,gmr-sru‘ m w O :U I lTI "0° ' as $ U g O I 90111‘ ‘z 21$ ‘M > > I U) "'“

< ‘

Dani‘ m (A) g; -. m- ad C I \l

_.__.____.________ 3%?‘5 -

"’ .—__—— 4 E —~ I'- ———_|- _

~ _'

- E a s I- w Efi' _ _ co a: _m O c ‘=- -_~ 4- _ g gm;

______-—————--- e o 3 --—-— 55; 5m 5 r<n c a a:

Z-e —l > .. , a‘,

.immummv '

- 544J1E>CBDI14E8

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 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, 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 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/enflPrintIFrame.htmi 7/25/2016

10

11

12

13

15

l6

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26,

27

28

\o_oo

\14_o\

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

Attorneys for Defendants WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. dba AMERICA’S SERVICING COMPANY and U.S. BANK, NA. AS TRUSTEE

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

; REGINA MANANTAN,

14-

Plaintiff,

vs.‘

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., D/B/A AMERICA’S SERVICING COMPANY, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE, SUCCESSOR-TN-INTEREST TO BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL .

ASSOCIATION AS TRUSTEE,,

SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO LASALLE BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS

5 TRUSTEE FOR MORGAN STANLEY MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2007-7AX,

1 QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION, MOAB, INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,

Defendants.

55000,]722/81681241

Case No. CIV 535902

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

Date: July 29, 2016 Time: 9:00 a.m. Dept.: Law & Motion

Action Filed: October 20, 2015 Trial Date: None Set

CIV 535902

DEFENDANTS’ OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER‘ TO PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

I. INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTION TO SURREPLY

Defendants WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. dba AMERICA’S SERVICING COMPANY

and U.S. BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE (“Defendants”) filed a demurrer to Plaintiff REGINA

MANANTAN’s (“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 briefing or oral

argument after the matter was submitted by all parties following oral argument. Nevertheless, in

a procedurally improper attempt to influence this Court’s ruling, Plaintiff filed 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 briefing. 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 1n Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint.

Paragraph 60 of Plaintiffs SAC states, in pertinent part, the 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 of America case.

(Glaski, (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 1079, 1094-1095.) In their briefing, 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

550001722/81681241 , M CIV 535902.

DEFENDANTS’ OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAIN’ IIFF’S SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

ALAN

\10\UI

10

ll 12

13

l4

15

16

l7

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

‘the Court expressly declined to determine whether Plaintiffs “Closing Date” theory alleges facts

sufficient to render a foreclosure void as Plaintiff contends in the briefing and at oral argument in

this case.P

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

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

Plaintiffs “Closing Date” theory set forth in the SAC:

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.

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

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

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

B. Saterbak Properly Holds the Assignment is Merely Voidable under Plaintiffs “Closing Date” Theory

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

presented in Plaintiffs “Closing Date” theory rendered an assignment void or merely voidable, the

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

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

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

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

Saterbak decides the question at issue in this case as follows:

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 beneficiary”].

(Saterbak, supra, 245 Cal.App.4th at 815.) Because the Court determined the assignment 55000.1722/8168124.1 2 CIV 535902

'

DEFENDANTS’ OBJECTION'AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OFDEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF ’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

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 it in their briefing — that the assignment was

recorded prior to the enactment 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

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

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

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

‘ DATED: July 25, 2016 SEVERSON & WERSON A Professional Corporation Byr $1., .

>

Brian S.,'Whittemore

Attorneys for Defendants WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. dba AMERICA’S SERVICING COMPANY and U.S. BANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE

55000.1722/8l68124J 3 CIV 535902‘

DEFENDANTS‘ OBJECTION AND RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

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

,_i

\owooqosgn-bww

PROOF OF SERVICE Regina Manantan v“; Wells Fargo’ Bank, N.A., et a].

San Mateo County Superior Court Case No. CIV 535902

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 PLAINTIFF’S SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

on the interested parties in this action as follows:

Timothy L. McCandless, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff Regina Manantan Law Officcs of Timothy McCandless Telephone: (925) 957-9797 26875 Calle Hermosa, Suite A Facsimile: (925) 957-9799 Capistrano Beach, CA 92624 E-Mail: legal@prodefenders.com

Joanna Kozubal, Esq. Attorneys for Defendant Moab Investment 375 Potrero Avenue, #5 Group, LLC San Francisco, CA 94103 Telephone: (415) 864-6962

Facsimile: (650) 636-9791

Nancy Lee, Esq. Attorneys for Defendant Quality Loan Service McCarthy & Holthus, LLP Corporation

5

1770 4th Avenue Telephone: (619) 685-4800 ‘ San Diego, CA 92101 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

v package for collection and overnight delivery at an office 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

55000.1722/8168124.1 CIV 535902

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

r » s

Pass 1. o€2

, _ __ _‘-\ ca __ E “FA O- cibmb‘ 'fiJQ" I; ‘WEE 9'30 w ~ a gfigifiég m<

_

~ = 0>CO>;—QEE%_Z m __ — E flu _ a: E g . 358306- __—""___.___———~————~ WE em m o - aw. a» s m- g m .5 Z m m‘ as Ozm's M 53' o g :1‘, @1115,‘-

-—————————___-_-. ~ 2 -»-. "1 a I‘. 2 P’ '

-=~ -—-—_- __,. _._. u‘.

=-_...-___-.____'—_—-“Z I”. - H; . I 8 O E ______________________

¢

' y 5%. g; >:r:"'l

,——————-—-____--_-_ :u m 1~ ,

z s s2> gm, %__ _ U U all?‘ ,m a [IQ '-_ _ ._ |— g 0b“; ~——-—*_. - ___-l-.._ _ - ITI gau- .m O a’ Zr‘- , > 0 ¢_ (n 5m; .-——, (I, ll-

> a rm“- ¢p 7U A Q W’ ‘ '~

. .nsmsumm '

b ° 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 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,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, 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 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 cit-2i

—- —r

Q E % E oc~ o cumuoamo

_______________-_-- lit W‘? ° 5w e w @- 5%?5 ., ~ 1 __ . E 19> m ‘I o 33.923072.- m ‘I WE g2 O‘ > MES’, 8 a ‘m, > ‘1 ' = to 'u Z @9225? w c» WE s'“ O z ale W30

" l-—-—-_-_--_-_________PC_ w :mé Z rn as as egg m1 8 E Q ‘,‘U 0- g fill-“*3;

---—--—--=______——_ w ~ - E O > m an pg; '.__-__-‘ , 0| 1" E O § > 3 ~ My u‘ 4‘ ’

-_._I -_, E n r g ,m‘ > N 1 _ 7?- = fi > z m ‘M__-— " ___

‘ E <0 C ------—‘~ . 1% E g e m m

. W,’ w‘ E 1: g 8

_ “I” 1: ~- m 770).“, .___. _ m' O C a 800 m1 E m g 3:15

. m I m?‘ ‘

__......._...._..__.___... O o a) zr-‘E —_-—, <: C w a’ ._—_..'__...__' (n . I11 I- B‘ ‘_—‘—'_‘. O .W (O E _‘ m: 11 3 Q '8 "'_—~ o w 55 > , .. -

JiilfliiTlIMilv - 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 affix 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, 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 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 1 of 2

_-' "i E ~r~ O cmmomwc

é}? E saga, _. Z ease;- _—-—_n ‘_ R = V N g "\m ~ -----—-—— = e> o > o ~§ wE -= a, = z a‘ o z wge 3' s: -—---——_____._ —| a g s ,, o was... w .= 89 11 -< ~atn 09°30 m 8 E m O I‘ .108 ‘E5...’ m w = o :U > 08% “I w = _| -<_i11 2 ‘02;t m O5 -_ g, ,1:- —_ w z > I (I) g .02}?

—--—---".._......._..__..._""'"" a _ A g r;

'g m > ' ___

"' wag ES g :C: a.

—__-— " = m _ _ _-:E'_=i '1"! 'o * ‘: M 6 a ‘21%.. _._ fi__ _

g “gs ________________.__._.__._.__.._ I’ "1 W z 3-1?‘ m _

I ___ 0 gin] :- 9 o Q a 25E

;_-—--'——"__.___ w o g r- g M A .. H

__......_._._..."""'"'-""'-'————- >3 g g g Z -\- -r > if, , “mum.” "‘

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 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.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, 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.fedex.com/shipping/html/enl/PrintiFramehtml 7/25/2016