Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-00884/USCOURTS-cand-3_14-cv-00884-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1330 Breach of Contract

---

Case No. 14-cv-00884-NC

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

YOLANDA BUMATAY MULATO, et 

al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.14-cv-00884-NC 

TENTATIVE RULING ON MOTION 

TO DISMISS

Re: Dkt. No. 148

The Court has reviewed Wells Fargo’s motion to dismiss and tentatively finds that 

the facts alleged in the second amended complaint, Dkt. No. 148, are not sufficient to state 

a claim under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 9(b) and 12(b)(6) on all causes of action. 

The Court previously dismissed all claims except Mulato’s second cause of action under 

the ECOA, as pled in the first amended complaint, Dkt. No. 27. The parties should be 

prepared to highlight whether that claim has changed in the second amended complaint.

As to the other causes of action, the Court tentatively finds that the deficiencies

outlined in its two prior orders, Dkt. Nos. 106, 139, still exist in the second amended

complaint. As with the last complaint, the Court finds that the complaint is burdened with 

historical discussion and legal argument, but contains few relevant facts. Therefore, at the 

hearing, the plaintiffs should be prepared to proffer additional facts to demonstrate that 

amendment would not be futile. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 5, 2015 _____________________________________

NATHANAEL M. COUSINS

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:14-cv-00884-NC Document 155 Filed 10/05/15 Page 1 of 1