NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

U.S. BANK, N.A., Successor Trustee to 

Bank of America, NA, Successor in Interest 

to LaSalle Bank, NA, as Trustee, on Behalf 

of the Holders of the Washington Mutual 

Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, 

WMALT Series 2007-OA5, 

Plaintiff-counterdefendant-Appellant, 

 v. 

RED ROCK FINANCIAL SERVICES, 

LLC; SHADOW SPRINGS COMMUNITY 

ASSOCIATION, 

Defendants-Appellees, 

EAGLE INVESTORS, 

Defendant-counter-claimantAppellee.

No. 19-16566 

D.C. No. 

2:16-cv-02785-JCM-NJK 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

James C. Mahan, District Judge, Presiding

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

FILED

AUG 14 2020

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 

Submitted August 12, 2020**

San Francisco, California

Before: GRABER and BRESS, Circuit Judges, and DAWSON,*** District Judge.

Plaintiff U.S. Bank, N.A., timely appeals from the summary judgment 

entered in favor of Defendants Red Rock Financial Services, LLC; Shadow 

Springs Community Association ("Shadow Springs"); and Eagle Investors. 

Applying Nevada law, the district court held that Eagle Investors held valid title to 

the disputed property. Reviewing de novo, CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Corte Madera 

Homeowners Ass'n, 962 F.3d 1103, 1106 (9th Cir. 2020), we affirm.

1. The district court correctly held that Eagle Investors met its burden of 

proving superior title. See Res. Grp., LLC v. Nev. Ass'n Servs., 437 P.3d 154, 156 

(Nev. 2019) (en banc) ("[E]ach party in a quiet title action has the burden of 

demonstrating superior title in himself or herself."). The foreclosure sale, validly 

conducted pursuant to Nevada Revised Statutes section 116.31162 through section 

116.21168,1complied with all statutory requirements, thereby extinguishing all 

liens with priority lower than Shadow Springs' lien. SFR Invs. Pool 1, LLC v. U.S. 

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*** The Honorable Robert T. Dawson, United States District Judge for the 

Western District of Arkansas, sitting by designation.

1 All citations to the Nevada Revised Statutes are to the version of the code in 

effect at the time of the foreclosure sale.
3 

Bank, N.A., 334 P.3d 408, 410–12 (Nev. 2014) (en banc) superseded by statute on 

other grounds as stated in Saticoy Bay LLC 9050 W Warm Springs 2079 v. Nev. 

Ass'n Servs., 444 P.3d 428 (Nev. 2019). Reviewing the undisputed evidence, the 

only reasonable inference is that part of the lien was for unpaid "assessments for 

common expenses." Nev. Rev. Stat. § 116.3116(2). Accordingly, the foreclosure 

sale extinguished the deed of trust. See SFR Invs., 334 P.3d at 419 ("NRS 

116.3116(2) gives [a homeowner's association] a true superpriority lien, proper 

foreclosure of which will extinguish a first deed of trust.").

2. The district court correctly held that no equitable basis exists for setting 

aside the sale. Even assuming that Shadow Springs' letters misstating the legal 

effect of the lien constituted unfairness, U.S. Bank has not pointed to any evidence, 

such as its own reliance on the letters not to contest the sale, that the letters 

affected the sale. See Res. Grp., LLC, 437 P.3d at 160–61 (holding that "a court 

may set the sale aside" only "if the totality of the circumstances demonstrates that 

the sale itself was affected by 'fraud, unfairness, or oppression'"); Nationstar 

Mortg., LLC v. Saticoy Bay LLC Series 2227 Shadow Canyon, 405 P.3d 641, 

648–49 (Nev. 2017) ("[I]f the district court closely scrutinizes the circumstances of 

the sale and finds no evidence that the sale was affected by fraud, unfairness, or 

oppression, then the sale cannot be set aside, regardless of the inadequacy of 

price." (emphasis added)); see also Res. Grp. LLC, 437 P.3d at 160 ("The party 
4 

seeking to set aside the sale on equitable grounds bears the burden to produce 

evidence showing that the sale was affected by fraud, unfairness, or oppression that 

would justify setting aside the sale." (internal quotation marks and brackets 

omitted)).

AFFIRMED.