David Joyner v. Bank of America Home Loans Servicing, Lp

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DAVID JOYNER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA HOME LOANS
SERVICING, LP and MORTGAGE
ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION
SYSTEMS, INC.,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 10-16885
D.C. No. 2:09-cv-02406-GMN-
RJJ
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted May 15, 2012**
Before: CANBY, GRABER, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
David Joyner appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing
his action arising out of foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28
FILED
MAY 25 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-16885 2
U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. King v. California, 784 F.2d 910, 912 (9th
Cir. 1986). We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Joyner’s claims for the reasons stated
in its order entered on July 26, 2010.
Contrary to Joyner’s contention, the district court properly applied federal
pleading standards following the removal of the action from state court based on
diversity jurisdiction. See Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA, 317 F.3d 1097, 1102
(9th Cir. 2003) (“The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure apply irrespective of the
source of subject matter jurisdiction, and irrespective of whether the substantive
law at issue is state or federal.”).
Joyner’s remaining contentions, including those concerning the funding and
securitization of the loan and standing to bring non-judicial foreclosure, are
unpersuasive.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --