N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT HEATHER F. LUKASHIN; IGOR LUKASHIN, Plaintiffs - Appe lla nts, v. SUTTELL & HAM M ER PS; e t a l., De fe nda

nts - Appe lle e s. No. 13-35353 D.C . No. 3:12-c v-05932-R B L M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the W e ste rn Distric t of W a shington R o n a ld B . Le ighton, District Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Se pte m

be r 21, 2015 * * B e fore : REINHAR

DT, LEAVY, a

nd B E R ZON, C irc uit Judge s. He athe r F. Luka shin a

nd Igor Luka shin a

ppe a l pro se from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt dismi ssing the ir a c t ion a lle ging c la im s unde r the Fa ir De bt C olle c tion Pra c tic e s Ac t (“ FDC PA” ) a nd sta te la w a ga inst thela

w firm and 

# FIL ED SEP 25 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt, a

nd de nie s the Luka shins’ m otion for ora l argum e nt, file d on Se pte m

be r 20, 2014. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).la

wy e rs re pre se nting C a

pita l One B ank (USA), N.A. in a sta te c ourt de bt c o lle c tion c a se re lating to Mrs. Luka shins’ unpa id c re dit c ard ba la nc e . W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291. W e re vie wde novo a distric t c ourt’ s dismissa l for fa ilure to sta te a c l a im unde r Fe de ra l R

ule of C ivil Proc e d

ure 12(b)(6), a

nd m a y a ffirm on any ground supporte d

by the re c ord. Thompson v . Paul , 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th C ir. 2008). W e a ffirm . The distric t c ourt prope rly dismisse d the Luka s hins’ FDC PA c la im be c a use the L uka shins fa i le d to a lle g e fa c ts suffic ie nt to show a qua l ify i ng de b t or a c tiona ble c onduc t unde r the FDC PA. Se e 15 U.S.C . § 1692a (5) (de fining debt unde r the FDC PA); 15 U.S.C . §§ 1692e (2)(A), (10) (e xpla ining prohibite d pra c tic e s unde r the FDC PA); se eHe bbev . Plile r , 627 F.3d 338, 341-42 (9th C ir. 2010) (a lthough pro se ple a dings a re libe ra lly

c onstrue d, pla intiff m

ust a lle g e fa c ts suffic i e nt to sta

te a pla u sible c l a im). The distric t c ourt prope rly dismisse d the Luka s hins’ c la im unde r the W a shington C onsum e r Prote c tion Ac t (“ W C PA” ) be c a use de fe nda

nts’ a lle ge d m isc o nduc t wa s e x e m

pt unde r the W C PA. Se eHangman Ridge Training Stable

s, Inc . v . Safe c o Title

Ins. C o ., 719 P.2d 531, 533 (Wa sh. 1986) (se tting forth e le m e nts of a W C PA c la im); Short v . De mopolis , 691 P.2d 163, 168 (Wa sh. 1984) (e n ba nc ) (c la im s re late d to the“ a c tua l pra c tic e of la w” are e x e m

pt unde r the 2 1 3 - 3 5 3 5 3W C PA).

The distric t c ourt prope rly dismisse d the Luka s hins’ c la im unde r the W a shington C olle c t ion Age nc y Ac t (“ W C AA” ) be c a

use the Luka shins fa ile d to a lle ge fa c ts suffic ie nt to show tha t de fe nda nt la wfirm qua l ifie d a s a

de bt c olle c tion a ge nc y unde r the W C AA. S e e W a sh. R e v. C ode § 19.16.100(4) (de fining a c olle c tion a ge nc y

unde r the W C AA); s e ealso He b be , 627 F.3d a t 341-42. De nia l of le ave to a

m e nd wa s not a

n a buse of disc re tion be c a

u se am e ndm e nt would ha ve be e n futile . Se eLope

z v . Smith , 203 F.3d 1122, 1130 (9th C ir. 2010) (e n ba nc ) (a distric t c o urt should gra

nt le av e to a

m e nd unle s s “ the ple a ding c ould not possibly

be c ure d by

the a lle gat ion of othe r fa c ts” (c ita tion a nd inte rna l quota t ion m arks om itte d)). The distric t c ourt did not a buse its disc re tion in deny ing theLuka shins’ Fe de ra l R ule of C i vil Proc e dure 11 m o tion for sa nc tions be c a

use de fe nda

nts’ Rook e r-Fe ldman argum e nt wa s ne ithe r frivolous nor lac king in support. Se e C oote r &Ge l l v . Hartmarx C orp ., 496 U.S. 384, 405 (1990) (se tting forth sta

nda rd of re v ie w). The Luka shins’ re que st for judic ia l notic e , file d on April 11, 2014, is gra nte d only a s to thesta

te c ourt supe rior a

nd a ppe lla te doc ke t s, but is othe

rwise de nie d a s unne c e ssa

ry . All other pe nding m otions a re de n ie d. 3 1 3 - 3 5 3 5 3All pe nding re q u e sts in the

Luka shins’ ope ning brie f are de nie d . AFFIRM E D.

4 1 3 - 3 5 3 5 3