Presently before the court is defendant Quality Loan Services Corp.'s ("Quality") motion to dismiss. (Doc. # 4). Pro se plaintiff Richard Blanchard filed a response in opposition, (doc. # 10), and defendant Quality filed a reply (doc. # 11). Defendant Federal National Mortgage Association ("Fannie Mae") filed a joinder to defendant Quality's motion to dismiss (doc. # 9), and a joinder to defendant Quality's reply to plaintiff's response (doc. # 12).
Also before the court is plaintiff's motion for an order to show cause. (Doc. # 14). Defendant Quality filed a response in opposition (doc. # 15), and plaintiff did not file a reply.
Plaintiff Richard Blanchard is the former owner of property located at 2503 Vegas Vic Street, Henderson, Nevada ("the property"). The property was financed through a note and deed of trust promising to repay $360,000.00 in monthly installments to The Mortgage Store of Denver. (Doc. # 4-1).*fn1 On September 8, 2006, the deed of trust was recorded. (Doc. # 4-1). On September 26, 2006, the Mortgage Store of Denver recorded an assignment in favor of JP Morgan Chase Bank. (Doc. # 4-2).
On November 15, 2010, JP Morgan Chase Bank recorded an assignment of the deed of trust in favor of Mortgage Electronic Systems, Inc. ("MERS"). (Doc. # 4-3). On February 4, 2011, MERS recorded an assignment of the deed of trust in favor of Fannie Mae. (Doc. # 4-4). On February 14, 2011, Fannie Mae recorded a substitution of trustee and appointed Quality as the foreclosure trustee. (Doc. # 4-5). On February 18, 2011, Quality commenced the foreclosure process by recording a notice of default and election to sell.
Plaintiff has now filed three lawsuits related to this property and this foreclosure process. On June 9, 2011, plaintiff filed an action in state court against Quality and others, arguing defects in Quality's foreclosure process. See Blanchard v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, no. 2:11-cv-1127-JCM, 2012 WL 5198468 (D. Nev. Oct. 18, 2012). The sale of the property was postponed. Id.
Defendants removed the first action to this court. Id. This court dismissed the case because plaintiff failed to disclose the prepetition causes of action in his bankruptcy matter and was therefore estopped from bringing his claims. Id. at *5-6.
On December 21, 2012, Quality recorded another notice of sale, scheduling the sale for January 9, 2013. (Doc. #4-7). Fannie Mae purchased the property at an auction on January 9, 2013.
On December, 27, 2012, plaintiff filed the instant action, and second overall action, against Fannie Mae and Quality alleging virtually all of the same claims which were advanced in the first litigation. (Doc. #1). On February 7, 2013, plaintiff filed a third action against Fannie Mae, Quality, and Pite Duncan, LLP., case number 2:13-cv-00214-JCM-PAL. On February 28, 2013, Quality filed a motion to consolidate the third case with the instant case. (Doc. #19).
On April 16, 2013, Magistrate Judge Peggy Leen granted the motion to consolidate (doc. # 19) and the motion to stay discovery (doc. # 21). Because the motion to consolidate has been granted, the order in this case will dispose of the third case, case number 2:13-cv-00214-JCM-PAL.
The legal standards for claim preclusion, res judicata, and issue preclusion, collateral estoppel, are both relevant to resolve the instant motion to dismiss.
Claim preclusion, also referred to as res judicata, "provides that a final judgment on the merits bars further claims by parties or their privies based on the same cause of action." Tahoe-Sierra Pres. Counsel, Inc. v. Tahoe Reg'l Planning Agency, 322 F.3d 1064, 1077 (9th Cir. 2003) (internal citations and quotations omitted). "A final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies form relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action." Federated Dep't Stores, Inc. v. Moitie, 453 U.S. 394, 398 (1981). "The doctrine of res judicata is meant to ...