Thi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

The pane l una ni m ous l y c onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed . R . A p p . P . 3 4 (a) (2). NOT F OR P UB L I CA T I ON UN I TE D STATE S COURT OF APPE ALS FOR THE NI NTH CI RCUI T BR I A N PH I LLI PS, P la in tiff

- A p p e lla n t, v. W E L L S F A R G O B A N K , N . A . , A s Trust ee f or the R egi st er ed H ol der s of S tructure d A s s e tSec ur i t i e s C orpor a t i on M ort ga ge Pas s Thr ough- C e rt i f

i c a t e s Ser i e s 2007- OS I a n d OC W E N L OA N S E R VI C I NG , LL C, D efend an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 10- 55158 D. C. No. 3 : 0 9 - c v - 0 1 4 8 6 - H- BLM M E M OR AN DU M *

A p p eal fr o m th e U n i t ed S t at es D i stri ctC o u rt fo r th e S o u th e rn D is tric t o f C a lifo rn ia M a r i l yn L. H uf

f , D i s tr i c tJ udge , Pr e s i di ng Subm i tt e d D e c e m be r14, 2010 ** B e f o r e : G O O D W I N , W A L L A C E , a n dW . F L E T C H E R , C ir c u itJ u d g e s . B r i a n Phi l l i ps appe a l s pr o s e f r om the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s j udgm e ntdi s m i s s i ng



# FI L ED DEC 27 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U . S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS10- 55158 2 h i s T ruth in L en d i n g A ct(“T IL A ”) and st at e l aw act i o n ari si n g o u to f a f o r e c lo s u r e . W e h a v e ju r is d ic ti o n u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o . Kin gv . Ca lifo rn ia , 7 8 4 F . 2 d 9 1 0 , 9 1 2 (9th C i r. 1 9 8 6 ). W e affi rm i n p art , reverse in p a rt, a n d r e m a n d . The di s tr i c tc ourtpr ope r l y di s m i s s e d Phi l l i ps ’ s TI LA c l a i m s e e ki ng r e s c is s io n b e c au s e itw a s ti m e - b a rr e d . Se e Migue lv . C ountr yFundi ng C or

p. , 309 F. 3d 1161, 1164 ( 9th C i r . 2002) (T IL A ’s r i g h to f r esci ssi o n ex p i res th ree years a f t e rthe da t e of

c ons um m a t i on of

the tr a ns a c t i on orupon the s a l e of the pr ope rty, w h ic h e v e r o c c u rs fir s t). P h illip s a ls o fa ile dto a lle g e a n ab ility to te n d e r d e s p ite be i ng w a rne d by the di s tr i c tc ourtof thi s r e qui r e m e nta nd be i ng gi ve n the o p p o rtu n ity to d o s o . Se e Yamam oto v . Ban k of N. Y. , 3 2 9 F .3 d1 1 6 7 , 1 1 7 1 (9 th C i r . 2003) ( “[ I ] n appl yi ng TI LA , atr i a l j udge ha s the di s c r e t i on t o c ondi t i on r e s c i s s i on on t e nde rby the borr ow e rof the pr ope rty he ha d r e c e i ve d f r om the l en d er. ”) ( i n t ernal qu o t at i o n m arks an db rackets om i tt ed ). The di s tr i c tc ourtdi s m i s s e d Phi l l i ps ’ s s t a t e l aw c l a i m s be c aus e he di d not m a ke ava l i d of

f e rt o t e nde rthe a m ounttha the w a s i n de f aul t . H ow e ve r , Phi l l i ps al l eged thathe w as no ti n d ef aul tbecause he had acc ept ed, and abi ded b y, tw o l oan m o d if ic a ti o n a g r e e m e n t. T h e s e a ll e g a ti o n s , if tru e , c o u ld s u p p o rt a c la im . Se e, e . g. B a n k o f A m . , N . A . v. L a Jo l la G rp . II, 28 C a l . Rptr . 3d 825, 827- 29 ( C a l . A pp.10- 55158 3 2 0 0 5 ) ( in v a lid a tin g afo re c lo s u re s a le b e c au s e th e m o rtg a g o r h a dc u re dth e d e fa u lt be f or e the s a l e ) . A c c or di ngl y, w e r e ve r s e the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s j udgm e nta nd r e m a nd f o rf u rth e rp r o c e e d in g s . P h il li p s ’ s r e m a in in g c o n te n ti o n s a r e u n p e r s u a s iv e . E a c h p a rty s h a ll b e a rit s o w n c o s ts o n ap p e a l. AF F I RM E D i n p a r t , RE VE RS E D i n p a r t , a n d RE M AN DE D.