From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Samzelius v. Bank of Am., N.A.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Aug 5, 2016
No. 13-15115 (9th Cir. Aug. 5, 2016)

Opinion

No. 13-15115

08-05-2016

JAN SAMZELIUS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., as Successor by Merger LaSalle Bank National Association as Trustee for Morgan Stanley Loan Trust 2006-3AR; WELLS FARGO BANK, NA, Defendants - Appellees.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 3:12-cv-03295-EDL MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Elizabeth D. Laporte, Magistrate Judge, Presiding Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

Jan Samzelius appeals from the district court's judgment dismissing his action alleging federal and state law claims related to his mortgage. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the denial of leave to amend. Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1041 (9th Cir. 2011). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing the amended complaint without leave to amend because further amendment would have been futile. See id. (explaining that "a district court may dismiss without leave where . . . amendment would be futile").

We do not consider the district court's dismissal order because Samzelius failed to address the district court's dismissal of his claims in his opening brief. See Smith v. Marsh, 194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) ("[A]rguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived.").

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Samzelius v. Bank of Am., N.A.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Aug 5, 2016
No. 13-15115 (9th Cir. Aug. 5, 2016)
Case details for

Samzelius v. Bank of Am., N.A.

Case Details

Full title:JAN SAMZELIUS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., as…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Aug 5, 2016

Citations

No. 13-15115 (9th Cir. Aug. 5, 2016)

Citing Cases

Gates v. Kassam

To be valid, a tender must be ‘“unconditional”' such that the transaction is complete upon the offeree's…