Stephen Johnson v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.

694 F. App'x 521
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided July 18, 2017·No. 16-56156·Unpublished

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Stephen H. Johnson and Paula A. Johnson appeal pro se from the district court’s order dismissing their action seeking declaratory relief under the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). Cervantes v. Countrymde Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2011). We may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Franklin v. Terr, 201 F.3d 1098, 1100 n.2 (9th Cir. 2000). We affirm.

Dismissal of the Johnsons’ action alleging a TILA claim for rescission was proper because the Johnsons did not exercise their right of rescission within three years of when they consummated the loan transaction. See 15 U.S.C. § 1635(f); Beach v. Ocwen Fed. Bank, 523 U.S. 410, 412-13, 419, 118 S.Ct. 1408, 140 L.Ed.2d 566 (1998) (explaining that “§ 1635(f) completely extinguishes the right of rescission at the end of the 3-year period”).

AFFIRMED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Stephen Johnson v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 694 F. App'x 521 (9th Cir. 2017).

694 F. App'x 521 (Stephen Johnson v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Beach v. Ocwen Federal Bank
523 U.S. 410 (Supreme Court, 1998)
Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
656 F.3d 1034 (Ninth Circuit, 2011)
Franklin v. Terr
201 F.3d 1098 (Ninth Circuit, 2000)