United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle
ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS JOHN MCINTOSH AND RCO LEGAL, P.S.
MARSHA J. PECHMAN, District Judge.
The Court, having received and reviewed:
1. Defendants McIntosh and RCO Legal, P.S. Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 10)
2. Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 16)
3. Defendants McIntosh and RCO Legal, P.S. Reply in Support of the Their Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 20)
and all attached declarations and exhibits, makes the following ruling:
IT IS ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED; Defendants John McIntosh and RCO Legal, P.S. are DISMISSED from this lawsuit with prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' motion for attorney fees is DENIED.
Plaintiff Angela K. Main had two mortgages on her Kirkland residence. (Dkt. No. 1-3 at 3.) She stopped making loan payments in September 2012, and non-judicial foreclosure commenced in 2013. (Dkt. No. 1-3 at 3.) Mediation was attempted during the foreclosure process, at which Defendant John McIntosh, an attorney for Defendant RCO Legal, P.S. ("RCO"), a law firm, represented Northwest Trustee Services, Inc ("NWTS"). (Dkt. No. 1-3 at 7.)
On February 14, 2014, Plaintiff filed this case in King County Superior Court, alleging violations of Deed of Trust Act ("DTA"), the unconstitutionality of the DTA, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of "HAMP guidelines, " breach of contract, CPA violations, TILA violations, negligent and/or intentional infliction of emotional distress, and fraud. (Dkt. No. 1-3.) On March 11, 2014, Defendants removed the case to this Court based on federal claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and supplemental state claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1367(a). (Dkt. No. 1.)
I. Merits of 12(b)(6) dismissal
The Federal Rules require a plaintiff to plead "a short and plain statement of the claim, " showing entitlement to relief. Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). "To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 2017state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Ashcroft v. Iqbal , 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (citing Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). A claim is plausible "when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable of the misconduct alleged." ...