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

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
• Decided: July 18, 2017
• Docket: 16-56156
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 18 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

STEPHEN H. JOHNSON; PAULA A. No. 16-56156 JOHNSON, D.C. No. 5:15-cv-02609-DDP-JEM Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v. MEMORANDUM*

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., as Successor-In-Interest to Washington Mutual Bank Its Successors and/or Assigns; DOES, 1-25, Inclusive,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Dean D. Pregerson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 11, 2017**

Before: CANBY, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.

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

* 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). 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. Countrywide

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 (1998) (explaining that

Ҥ 1635(f) completely extinguishes the right of rescission at the end of the 3-year

period”).

AFFIRMED.

2 16-56156