SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO . A - 4358
- 16T3 THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, as indenture trustee, not in its individual capacity but solely as indenture trustee for GREENPOINT HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST SERIES 2004
- 1, Plaintiff

- Respondent,

v. KAREN SAINT,
Defendant
- Appellant,
and MR. SAINT, unknown spouse of KAREN SAINT and SLOMIS'S , INC. , Defendant s .

______________________________

Submitted March 13, 2018

– Decided July 9 , 2018 Before Judges Sumners and Moynihan. On appeal from Superior Court of Ne w Jersey, Chancery Division, Middlesex County, Docket No. F - 037841
- 14. Karen Saint, appellant pro se.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court . " A lthough it is posted on the internet , this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited . R. 1:36
- 3.2 A - 4358
- 16T3 Stradley, Ronon, Stevens & Young, LLP, attorneys for respondent ( Jacqueline Aiello and Eric M. Hurwitz , on the brief ).
PER CURIAM
Defendant Karen Saint appeals from a March 4, 2016 order denying her cross - motion to dismiss plaintiff Bank of New York
Mellon's (Mellon ) foreclosure complaint ; a June 24, 2016 order granting Mellon 's motion for summary judgment, striking defendant's answer, enteri ng default judgment against defendant, and forwarding the matt er to the Office of Foreclosure to proceed as uncontested; a March 6 , 2017 1 order denying defendant's motion
to cancel the mortgage ; 2 and a final judgment of foreclosure entered on April 3, 2017. Defendant argues:
POINT 1
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AND ABUSED ITS DISCRETION CONCLUDING THE ASSIGNMENT OF MORTGAGE DEMONSTRATES THE MORTGAGE WAS ASSIGNED TO PLAINTIFF.

1 The notice of appeal incorrectly dates this order as March 3, 2017.

2 Def endant did not brief this issue and we will not consider an a rgument not properly advanced. Sklodowsky v. Lushis , 417 N.J. Super. 648, 657 (App. Div. 2011). We, nonetheless, state our agreement with the trial judge's rationale and holding in denying defendant's motion.3 A - 4358
- 16T3 POINT 2
THE TRIAL COURT ER RED AND ABUSED ITS DISCRETION CONCLUDING PLAINTIFF POSSESSED THE ORIGINAL NOTE ON SEPTEMBER 9, 2014. POINT 3
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AND ABUSED ITS DISCRETION CONCLUDING PLAINTIFF POSSESSED THE ORIGINAL NOTE ON SEPTEMBER 9, 2014. POINT 4
THE TRIAL COURT ERRE D IN ITS CONCLUSION WHETHER THERE WAS SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO CONCLUDE PLAINTIFF MET ALL NOTICE REQUIREMENTS UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE LAW. POINT 5
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AND ABUSED ITS DISCRETION BY NOT FOLLOWING SUMMARY JUDGMENT CIVIL PROCEDURE. We conclude these arg uments are meritless and affirm. Defendant first contends the trial judge abused her discretion in concluding the assignment of mortgage demonstrated
that the mor tgage was assigned to Mellon , arguing the certifications submitted by employees of Oc wen Loan Servicing, LLC (Ocwen) , 3 did not sufficiently establish that Mellon and the assignee were the same so as to support the grant of summary judgment. The judge declined that arg ument , finding "not even a scintilla of information tha t would support that argument." We

3 Ocwen was plaintiff's loan servicer.4 A - 4358
- 16T3

agree. The judge considered an assignment to Mellon , " [ formerly ] known as Bank of New York as trustee, for the certificate holders of Greenpoint Loan Trust 2004[

- ] 1" recorded on January 26, 2010 . The March 31, 2016 certification submi tted by Ocwen employee Jesse
Rosenthal 4 addressed defendant's contention that "Greenpoint Home Loan Trust" and Mellon were "two different trust[s ] ," explaining Mellon, formerly known as "The Bank of New York as Trustee for the Certific ate holders of Green Point Mortgage Loan Trust 2004

- 1 and [Mellon], as Indenture Trustee, not in its individual capacity but solely as Indenture Trustee for Greenpo i nt Home Equity Loan Trust
2004
- 1 are one in the same entity." Defendant's argument that the judge abused her dis cretion by concluding plaintiff possessed the note on the date the foreclosure complaint was filed

— September 9, 2014

– is without merit. The judge initially found the certification of Ocwen employee Samantha Ball to be insufficient to prove plaintiff's possession of the
note at the time the complaint was filed. Ro senthal's

c ertification presented that his review of the loan documents revealed Ocwen, since the date the complaint was filed, had been in "possession, custody, and control" of the original no te

4 The judge directed plaintiff to file a supplemental certification.5 A - 4358
- 16T3

defendant executed; specifically, since September 8, 2014. 5 We reject defendant's argument that the certification is contradictory as to those dates. Rosenthal merely referenced the date the complaint was filed and the date the note came into possessi on. "[W]e [have] held that either possession of the note or an assignment of the mortgage that predated the original complaint confer[s] standing." Deutsche Bank Tr. Co. Ams. v. Angeles , 428 N.J. Super. 315, 318 (App. Div. 2012) (citing Deutsche Bank Tr. Co. Ams. v. Mitchell , 422 N.J. Super. 214, 216 (App. Div. 2011)). There is ample proof regarding both the note and the assignment; plaintiff had standing. We determine the balance of defendant's arguments 6

– that the judge abused her discretion in finding there was sufficient evidence to conclude defen dant defaulted on April 1, 2009 ; erred in concluding plaintiff met the notice requirements under State
and federal law ; and erred by accepting plain tiff's deficient certifications

– are without sufficient mer it to warrant

5 Rosenthal's certification was included in defendant's appendix. Both exhibits Rosenthal referenced as support for his contentions were not , however, included in the record.

6 We do not see that any of these arguments were raised to the trial judge. Although we need not consider them, Nieder v. Royal Indem. Ins. Co. , 62 N.J. 229, 234 (1973) , we address them briefly.6 A - 4358
- 16T3

dis cussion . R. 2:11
- 3(e)(1)(E). Rosenthal's certification complied with Rule 4:64
- 1(a)(2) and
- 2 (a) through (c) , and set
forth the date of the default and that a Notice of In tent to Foreclose (NOI) was sent to defendant on March 28, 2014 in accordance with the Fair Foreclosure Act , 7 N.J.S.A. 2A:50
- 56 . Th ey
were p roperly considered by the judge. "The only material issues in a foreclosure proceeding are the validity of the mortgage, the amount of the indebtedness, and the right of the mortgagee to resort to the mortgaged premises." Great
Falls Bank v. Pardo , 263 N.J. Super. 388, 394 (Ch. Div. 1993 ),
aff'd o.b. , 273 N.J . Super. 542 (App. Div. 1994). A mortgagor opposing summary judgment has a duty to present facts controverting the mortgagee's prima facie case. Spiotta v. William H. Wilson, Inc. , 72 N .J. Super. 572, 581 (App. Div. 1962). Unexplained conclusions and "[b]ald assertions are not capable of . . . defeating summary judgment." Ridge at Back Brook, LLC v.
Klenert , 437 N. J. Super. 90, 97
- 98 (App. Div. 2014). As the motion judge found, defendant has raised nothing more than bald

7 Again, the exhibit supporting Rosenthal's contentions was not included in this record; a copy of the NOI, however, is i ncluded in defendant's appendix .7 A - 4358
- 16T3

a ssertions. We apply the same standard 8 but do not defer to the trial court's conclusion granting or denying summary judgment. Townsend v. Pierre , 221 N.J. 36, 59 (2015). Having addressed defendant's contested issues, and there being no material is sues
ot herwise raised, we conclude the judge correctly granted summary judgment and entered final judgment of foreclosure.

A ffirmed.

8 The standard tha t governs the trial court, requires denial of sum mary judgment when " the competent evidential materials presented, when viewed in the light mos t favorable to the non
moving party, are sufficient to permit a rational factfinder to resolve the alleged disputed issue in favor of the non
- moving party." Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am. , 142 N.J. 520, 540 (1995) .