Rodolfo Velasquez v. Chase Home Finance LLC; Fannie Mae

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Velasquez’s
request for oral argument is denied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RODOLFO VELASQUEZ,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CHASE HOME FINANCE LLC;
FANNIE MAE,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 11-15090
D.C. No. 3:10-cv-01641-SI
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Susan Illston, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted December 19, 2011**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Rodolfo Velasquez appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment
dismissing his action arising out of foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Cervantes v. Countrywide Home
FILED
JAN 06 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-15090 2
Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.
We affirm for the reasons stated by the district court in its order entered on
January 10, 2011, dismissing Velasquez’s action.
Velasquez’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
We do not consider Velasquez’s contentions raised for the first time on
appeal. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --