Sfr Investments Pool 1, LLC v. Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae)

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: April 4, 2025
• Docket: 24-488
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 4 2025 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC, No. 24-488 D.C. No. Plaintiff - Appellant, 2:22-cv-01942-GMN-MDC v. MEMORANDUM* FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION (FANNIE MAE),

Defendant - Appellee,

and

NEWREZ, LLC, doing business as Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing,

Defendant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Gloria M. Navarro, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 31, 2025** Phoenix, Arizona

* 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). Before: HAWKINS, FISHER, and R. NELSON, Circuit Judges.***

SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC (SFR) appeals an adverse partial judgment

dismissing some but not all of its claims. Because we lack appellate jurisdiction

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we dismiss the appeal.

After suffering an adverse partial judgment, SFR voluntarily dismissed its

remaining claim without prejudice. See Concha v. London, 62 F.3d 1493, 1506

(9th Cir. 1995) (“Unless otherwise stated, [a voluntary] dismissal is ordinarily

without prejudice . . . .”). “[W]hen a party that has suffered an adverse partial

judgment subsequently dismisses any remaining claims without prejudice, and

does so without the approval and meaningful participation of the district court, this

court lacks jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.” Galaza v. Wolf, 954 F.3d 1267,

1272 (9th Cir. 2020). The district court did not approve of or meaningfully

participate in SFR’s voluntary dismissal. It was “never asked to, and did not, enter

a separate judgment.” Id. at 1269–70. Thus, there was no “final judgment” to

make “appealable an order that otherwise would have been non-final.” Id. at 1271.

We accordingly lack jurisdiction over this appeal.

DISMISSED.

*** The Honorable D. Michael Fisher, United States Circuit Judge for the Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit, sitting by designation.

2 24-488