James P. Campbell; Cheri A. Stadtlander v. Indymac Mortgage Services, a division of OneWestBank, FSB

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
JAMES P. CAMPBELL; CHERI A.
STADTLANDER,
Plaintiffs - Appellants,
v.
INDYMAC MORTGAGE SERVICES, a
division of OneWestBank, FSB;
MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC
REGISTRATION SERVICES,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 11-35826
D.C. No. 2:11-cv-00867-RSL
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Washington
Robert S. Lasnik, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted April 16, 2013**
Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
James P. Campbell and Cheri A. Stadtlander appeal pro se from the district
FILED
APR 23 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

11-35826 2
court’s judgment dismissing their action alleging violations of the Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) in connection with
foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
review de novo a dismissal for failure to state a claim and for an abuse of
discretion the denial of leave to amend. Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans,
Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040-41 (9th Cir. 2011). We may affirm on any ground
supported by the record, Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055, 1058-59 (9th Cir.
2008), and we affirm.
Dismissal of Campbell’s and Stadtlander’s RICO claims was proper because
the specific allegations in their complaint did not set forth facts demonstrating the
requisite pattern of racketeering activity involving more than one transaction, see
Sever v. Alaska Pulp Corp., 978 F.2d 1529, 1535 (9th Cir. 1992) (pattern requires
more than one scheme with a “single purpose which happen[s] to involve more
than one act taken to achieve that purpose”), and their remaining conclusory
allegations failed to allege fraud with the required particularity, see Fed. R. Civ. P.
9(b) (allegations of fraud must be “state[d] with particularity”).
The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying leave to amend the
complaint to add Regional Trustee Services Corporation as a defendant. See
Cervantes, 656 F.3d at 1041 (“Although leave to amend should be given freely, a

-- 2 of 3 --

11-35826 3
district court may dismiss without leave where a plaintiff’s proposed amendments
would fail to cure the pleading deficiencies and amendment would be futile.”).
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --