SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC

Opinion

* * *

SFR INVESTMENTS POOL 1, LLC, Case No. 3:22-cv-00128-MMD-CLB

Plaintiffs, ORDER v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC D\B\A MR. COOPER,

Defendant.

Plaintiff SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC sued Defendant Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, d\b\a Mr. Cooper in state court to stop a foreclosure sale of the property located at 6461 Meadow Hill Drive, Reno, Nevada 89509. (ECF No. 1-1 at 2-29.) Nationstar removed to this Court. (ECF No. 1.) The Court denied SFR’s motion for a preliminary injunction and granted Nationstar’s motion to dismiss the operative complaint. (ECF No. 25.) SFR appealed that order (ECF No. 29), and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded (ECF No. 32). Now that the Ninth Circuit has issued its mandate (ECF No. 34), the Court issues this order to execute it. See, e.g., United States v. Perez, 475 F.3d 1110, 1113 (9th Cir. 2007) (“lower courts are obliged to execute the terms of a mandate”). It is therefore ordered that the Court’s prior order (ECF No. 25 at 5-6) and corresponding judgment (ECF No. 28) are vacated, in part, only to the extent necessary to vacate the Court’s dismissal of SFR’s claim based on NRS §§ 107.200 or 107.210 regarding SFR’s allegation that Nationstar willfully failed to timely deliver the statements SFR requested under those statutes. /// /// 1 It is further ordered that the parties must file a joint status report proposing a series of next steps to bring this case to a final resolution within 30 days. DATED THIS 7* Day of March 2024.

MIRANDA M. DU CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE