ROSENBLUM v. BANK AS TRUSTEE TO WACHOVIA BANK 2004 (2020)

MEMORANDUM ***

Appellant Frank Rosenblum appeals from the dismissal of his Complaint for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo an order dismissing a complaint under Rule 12(b)(6), Manzarek v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins., 519 F.3d 1025, 1030 (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm.¹

Appellant argues that the district court improperly applied claim preclusion to dismiss his quiet title claim regarding real property located in Woodside, California. Federal law and California state law apply the same three elements to determine whether claim preclusion applies: “(1) an identity of claims, (2) a final judgment on the merits, and (3) privity between parties.” Tahoe- Sierra Pres. Council, Inc. v. Tahoe Reg'l Plan. Agency, 322 F.3d 1064, 1077 (9th Cir. 2003) (citation omitted); see also Boeken v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 48 Cal.4th 788, 108 Cal.Rptr.3d 806, 230 P.3d 342, 348 (Cal. 2010). Appellant disputes only the second element, the existence of a prior final judgment on the merits.

The extensive record before the court—which includes multiple California state and bankruptcy court proceedings dating back to 2003, including an April 1, 2016 decision by the California Court of Appeal conclusively determining that Appellee U.S. Bank's deed of trust encumbered fifty percent of the real property at issue—demonstrates that claim preclusion bars Appellant's quiet title claim under both federal and California state law.

AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Appellees’ Motion for Judicial Notice (Dkt. 22) is GRANTED.