Randy Springer v. U.S. BANK, Trustee for Mastr Asset Backed Securities Trust 2005-HE1, Mortgage Pass…

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RANDY SPRINGER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
U.S. BANK, Trustee for Mastr Asset
Backed Securities Trust 2005-HE1,
Mortgage Pass Through Certificates, Series
2005-HE1; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-16931
D.C. No. 2:15-cv-02471-APG-PAL
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Andrew P. Gordon, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted March 12, 2019**
Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Randy Springer appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment
and dismissal order in his action alleging federal and state law claims arising out of
foreclosure proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
MAR 19 2019
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-16931
review de novo. Barnett v. Centoni, 31 F.3d 813, 815, 816 (9th Cir. 1994). We
affirm.
The district court properly granted summary judgment on Springer’s
wrongful foreclosure claim because Springer failed to raise a genuine dispute of
material fact as to whether he has standing to challenge defendant’s authority to
foreclose or whether U.S. Bank lacks authority to foreclose. See Wood v.
Germann, 331 P.3d 859, 861 (Nev. 2014) (per curiam) (under Nevada law, a
homeowner lacks standing to challenge the validity of a voidable loan assignment);
Edelstein v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 286 P.3d 249, 260-61 (Nev. 2012) (explaining
that Nevada law permits the severance and independent transfer of deeds of trusts
and promissory notes without impairing the loan beneficiary’s right to foreclose).
The district court properly dismissed Springer’s fraud claim because
Springer failed to allege facts sufficient to satisfy the heightened pleading standard
set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b). See Kearns v. Ford Motor Co.,
567 F.3d 1120, 1124-25 (9th Cir. 2009) (holding that circumstances constituting
fraud must be stated with particularity).
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --