Federal Housing Finance Agency; v. Saticoy Bay, LLC

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE
AGENCY; et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
SATICOY BAY, LLC,
Defendant-Appellant.
No. 20-17447
D.C. No.
2:16-cv-02242-JAD-BNW
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Jennifer A. Dorsey, District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted February 18, 2022
Submission Withdrawn March 14, 2022
Resubmitted July 20, 2023
San Francisco, California
Before: McKEOWN and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges, and BENNETT,**
District Judge.
FILED
JUL 24 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The Honorable Richard D. Bennett, United States District Judge for
the District of Maryland, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 3 --

Defendant-Appellant Saticoy Bay LLC (“Saticoy”) appeals from the district
court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Plaintiffs-Appellees Federal
Housing Finance Agency, Federal National Mortgage Association, and Federal
Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (collectively, “Appellees”). We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the grant of summary judgment de
novo. Nationstar Mortg. LLC v. Saticoy Bay LLC, 996 F.3d 950, 954 (9th Cir.
2021).
Saticoy is a master LLC with numerous series LLCs that operate under its
umbrella. See Nev. Rev. Stat. § 86.296(2). Appellees sued Saticoy in district court
for declaratory judgment and to quiet title over 37 properties, each of which is
owned either by Saticoy or by one of its series LLCs. Appellees named Saticoy as
the defendant. They did not name any of the series LLCs as defendants. The
district court held that so long as they named and served the master LLC, Saticoy,
as a defendant, Appellees did not need to name the series LLCs as defendants in
order to exercise jurisdiction over them and their properties.
On appeal, Saticoy argues the district court lacked jurisdiction to grant relief
with respect to the series LLCs’ properties because Appellees failed to name the
series LLCs as defendants. On March 14, 2022, we certified to the Nevada
Supreme Court the question whether a series LLC must be sued in its own name
2

-- 2 of 3 --

for a court to obtain jurisdiction over it and its property, or whether a plaintiff need
only name and serve the master LLC. Fed. Hous. Fin. Agency v. Saticoy Bay,
LLC, 28 F.4th 115, 118 (9th Cir. 2022). On April 21, 2022, the Nevada Supreme
Court accepted the question, and on July 6, 2023, it issued an opinion answering
the question. The Nevada Supreme Court held that “a series LLC created pursuant
to NRS 86.296 must be sued in its own name for the court to obtain jurisdiction
over it, provided the series LLC has observed the corporate formalities provided
for in NRS 86.296(3).” Fed. Hous. Fin. Agency v. Saticoy Bay LLC, No. 84370,
2023 WL 4360100, at *1 (Nev. Jul. 6, 2023).
Based on the answer of the Nevada Supreme Court, we affirm in part,
reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings. We affirm the judgment with
respect to 372 Rushing Creek Court, owned by Saticoy. We reverse the judgment
with respect to the other properties, owned by the series LLCs. We remand to the
district court for whatever further proceedings it deems appropriate.
We GRANT Saticoy’s motion to strike a portion of Appellees’ citation of
supplemental authority (ECF No. 43).
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, REMANDED.
Costs are to be taxed against Appellees.
3

-- 3 of 3 --