Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-02015/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-02015-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act

---

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Summit Management Company, LLL; Caliber Home Loans, Inc.; and Vericrest Opportunity 

Loan Trust 2011-NPL1 (collectively, “Defendants”) seek dismissal of the complaint filed by Plaintiffs 

Manuel Lazo and Oralia Lazo pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. 

14.) On July 9, 2014, the Magistrate Judge found Plaintiffs’ claims failed either as a matter of pleading 

or a matter of law, and recommended Defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted in part. (Doc. 25.) 

The parties were granted fourteen days from the date of service, or until July 23, 2014 to file 

objections to the Findings and Recommendations. (Doc. 25 at 34.) In addition, the parties were

“advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the 

District Court’s order.” (Id., citing Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991)). However, no 

objections were filed. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi 

Valley United School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), this Court has conducted a de novo 

MANUEL LAZO and ORALIA LAZO,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

SUMMIT MANAGEMENT COMPANY, 

LLC; CALIBER HOME LOANS, INC.; and 

VERICREST OPPORTUNITY LOAN 

TRUST 2011-NPLI,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:14-cv-02015 - AWI - JLT

ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL THE FINDINGS 

AND RECOMMENDATIONS GRANTING IN 

PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS 

(Docs. 14, 25)

Case 1:13-cv-02015-AWI-JLT Document 26 Filed 07/24/14 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the Findings and 

Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. The Findings and Recommendations dated July 9, 2014 are ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Defendant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED IN PART as follows:

a. Plaintiff’s claims for cancellation of instruments (Count 1); quiet title (Count 2); 

wrongful foreclosure (Counts 3, 4, and 5); RICO violation (Count 6); breach of 

contract based upon the Servicer Participation Agreement (Count 7), Fair Debt 

Collection Practices Act (portion of Count 8), slander of title (Count 16), and 

civil conspiracy (Count 17) are DISMISSED with prejudice; and

b. Plaintiffs’ claims for a violation of the Rosenthal Act (Count 8); breach of 

contract related to the Trial Payment Plan (Count 9); promissory estoppel 

(Count 10); fraud (Counts 11, 12, and 13); and violation of Cal. Bus. Prof. Code 

§ 17200 (Count 18) are DISMISSED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND; and

3. Plaintiffs SHALL file a First Amended Complaint within twenty-one days of service of 

this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 24, 2014 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-02015-AWI-JLT Document 26 Filed 07/24/14 Page 2 of 2