Supporting, Informing & Connecting People in Foreclosure

Davies v. Deutsche Bank 9th Circuit Court of Appeals all documents are accessible.

Hi all,

My fight is at the 9th Circuit of Appeals BAP. Here is the access to the complete record on appeal and my thanks to SCRIBD for allowing others to access it.

I have spent countless hours sharing and understanding the complexities of the Monster MERS and the bank's self serving shortcuts to profits. Here is my entire file on appeal. It includes filings for abandonment in chapter 7, adversary, subpoenas for mers with the mers audit trail, and arguments of UCC 1, 3, 9 and California Title laws. This should be helpful for those interested in the current cases and arguments.

Appendix volumes 1 and 2 are the records on appeal and are referenced as ER, excerpts of records, Ex.,Exhibit and then the page number as it goes in order 0001 to 1001. It is easy to follow.

The best is to read the case is [Appendix Volume 1 and Volume 2] it is the entire record, including subpoenas from MERS and Deustche Bank with endorsements.

The Appellant Opening Brief is detailed. It is not perfect, but it is the paper needed if the case would require a next step.

Then the Appellee Opening Brief and my response to it Appellant's Reply Brief. There is an issue of Onewest and Deutsche Bank's relationships.

Appellant's RJN #1 and Appellant's RJN #2 deals with Deustche Bank and Onewest in other 9th circuit cases include In re Carter a S.D. Cal.2011 case. The cases demonstrate the agency relationship.

There is also the Transcript of the Hearing, which demonstrates the biases of the Judge. I won 2 motions for relief under Judge Donovan and then was assigned a new judge Scott Clarkson and I was his first case. He went from Attorney to Judge during my case. I am not sure why, but it was done.

Best

Brian Davies

760-898-8516

760-904-4928

Excerpts of Records

http://www.scribd.com/doc/58704429/Davies-v-Deutsche-Bank-Appellate...

http://www.scribd.com/doc/58704660/Davies-v-Deutsche-Bank-Appellate...

Appellant's Opening Brief

http://www.scribd.com/doc/58702207/Davies-v-Deutsche-Bank-Opening-B...

Appellee's Opening Brief

http://www.scribd.com/doc/60892271/Deutsche-Bank-Appelle-Opening-Br...

Appellant's Reply Brief

http://www.scribd.com/doc/61235368/Davies-v-Deutsche-Bank-Appelant-...

Transcript of Hearing

http://www.scribd.com/doc/59161560/Davies-Transcript-of-May-3-2011-...

Appellant's Requests for Judicial Notice #1 and RJN #2

http://www.scribd.com/doc/58704165/Davies-V-Deutsche-Bank-Appellate...

http://www.scribd.com/doc/60593521/Davies-V-Deutsche-Bank-Appellate...

Tags: Automatic, Bank, Davies, Deutsche, Motion, Motions, Objection, Relief, Stay, abandon, More…

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by ChrisNM on August 18, 2011 at 12:50pm

Mr Davies:

I would like to thank you for sharing this information, which you have obviously spent an enormous amount of time, energy, and (no doubt) money in generating. It appears I will be very much following in your footsteps in Central District BK... having similar circumstances. Being able to see what happened in your court appearance is most illuminating and helpful. As you point out, the judge in your case was clearly contrary and hostile. How a judge's personal biases can completely blind him or her to basic law principles is well beyond my understanding. No doubt my wife and I will face similar hurdles... but knowing what you went through is most helpful.

Thanks again, Chris Clemens

I have sent you a "friend" request

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by brian william davies on August 18, 2011 at 1:22pm

Sure I have done this all with the help of many and 99% appreciate it and for that I am grateful. For the 1% well they would steal from their mothers, and want to be reimbursed for what they stole all the time living for free from their mother. If you get my drift. Keep the fight going as the more lawsuits the more they pay in legal fees. BOA paid $1bb last quarter and increase of $500 million. The pressure will eventually build and break their backs if they do not assist our homeowners.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dina on August 20, 2011 at 6:49pm

Its persons like you that reminds us that there are really good GOD loving people. I know that you will be victorious in with your case.

Many blessings to you.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ChrisNM on August 22, 2011 at 1:32pm

Dear Dina,

Thanks for your response. Yes, there are God Loving people out there who care about others... what would we do without them?! Thanks for being one of those. Unfortunately, it seems like there are to few of them at the top of the food chain.

All the best, Chris

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by brian william davies on August 22, 2011 at 11:00am

There was a question--How may US Bank go to court to represent the trust.

Well the Trustee of a MBS Trust is essentially the MERS for the Trust. It is the nominee who represents the interests of the trust. Now usually the action will be done by the servicer who makes 10x the amount the trustee makes. The servicer will act as an agent for the nominee in court. They need to establish standing to do so by the psa and the power of attorney.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by ChrisNM on August 22, 2011 at 1:56pm

Brian-

I understand that the Trustee of an MBS Certificate trust can appear on behalf of the Certificate. What I see happening (in at least one of our mortgages and in other cases-like Salazar) is the MBS trust the Trustee is purporting to represent is not an MBS trust at all. It looks like one.. such as WFASC 2006-AR1... but this is not an MBS trust. It isn't really an entity at all- at least not a Security Trust entity. In the Salazar case which you mentioned, US Bank is appearing as Trustee for the "C-BASS Mortgage Loan Asset- Backed Certificates, Series 2006-CB2. There is no MBS trust with this designation. This name describes a Series of Certificates which were issued by C-BAss Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Securities Corporation (I am guessing this is the special purpose corporation that was involved... probably as the seller in the Certificate) , but there is no entity with this name- at least not an MBS Certificate with this specific name. I'm not sure I am explaining this well, but the entity containing the Salazar's Loan would look something like "C-BASS 2006-CB2". There would be other Certificates in the Series, such as C-BASS 2006-CB3,..CB4.. CB5.. etc. All of these are part of the Series of Certificates, but the Series is not any of the Certificates. I would think that the Trustee has to represent this Certificate itself and the investors in that Certificate- who are the real party of interest- (although they can't do that by IRS rules)- not something that describes an entire Series of Certificates which is not, in itself, an entity registered with the SEC as an MBS Certificate.

I think this is one of the frauds the Banks are trying to hide. Only the Trustee could possibly represent the real party of interest to the loans (the certificate holders), but by the rules regarding REMICS they are prohibited from doing so-or the Certificate could lose its REMIC status. There is no party who can actually appear on the holders behalf. Even if the Trustee legally could appear, the Certificate holders have no ownership in the assets of the Trust... only an incremental ownership to the cash flow generated by the Loans.

So US Bank call itself Trustees for the "Series", not the TRusts themselves. I wonder if anyone challenges this?

Do you Follow? Thanks, Chris