Case ID: f-appx_531/html/0095-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Beverley GRIFFITH-FENTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MERS, et al., Defendants, Chase Home Finance, LLC, et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 12-3357.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    Aug. 22, 2013.
    Beverley Griffith-Fenton, NY, pro se.
    Cynthia Ann Augello, Esq., Cullen and Dykman, LLP, Garden City, NY, for Defendants-Appellees.
    PRESENT: RICHARD C. WESLEY, PETER W. HALL, SUSAN L. CARNEY, Circuit Judges.
   SUMMARY ORDER

Appellant Beverley Griffith-Fenton, pro se, appeals from a final judgment dismissing her complaint alleging violations of the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq.; the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq.; the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq.; the Home Affordable Modification Program, and various state laws, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), for failure to state a claim. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history of the case, and the issues on appeal.

We review de novo a district court decision dismissing a complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) and § 1915(e)(2). See Litwin v. Blackstone Group, L.P., 634 F.3d 706, 715 (2d Cir.2011); Giano v. Goord, 250 F.3d 146, 149-50 (2d Cir.2001). After an independent review of the record and relevant case law, we affirm for substantially the same reasons articulated by the district court judge in his well-reasoned decision entered May 30, 2012.

We have considered all of Appellant’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.