Orozco v. Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing

Background

Pro se plaintiff Marco Orozco sued Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, NewRez LLC, Quality Loan Service Corporation, and VMC REO, LLC. He alleged that Quality Loan Service Corporation sold his home at a trustee’s foreclosure sale in June 2025 even though he had a complete loss-mitigation application pending with Shellpoint and was submitting requested updates. He also alleged that the defendants recorded defective foreclosure documents, including a notice of default, a notice of trustee’s sale, and a trustee’s deed upon sale in favor of VMC REO, LLC.

Orozco asserted claims under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the Truth in Lending Act, and unspecified California foreclosure statutes. He sought to void the foreclosure sale, cancel the trustee’s deed, restore title to him, and obtain damages and injunctive relief.

Motion and legal standard

Orozco initially filed an application for an emergency temporary restraining order seeking to prevent the defendants from evicting him, transferring title, or recording further instruments. The court converted that application into a motion for a preliminary injunction and ordered the defendants to respond. The defendants did not respond.

To obtain a preliminary injunction, Orozco had to show four things: a likelihood of success on the merits, a likelihood of irreparable harm without preliminary relief, a favorable balance of equities, and that an injunction would serve the public interest. The court stated that the first two factors were the most important and that failure to establish either required denial of the motion.

Court’s reasoning

The court did not decide the merits of Orozco’s claims. Instead, it concluded that he had not shown a likelihood of irreparable harm.

Orozco alleged that he faced eviction and that eviction would disrupt his living situation and interfere with his ability to pursue claims concerning the foreclosure. But his complaint was unverified, so the court could not treat it as evidence. The court likewise could not rely on the unsworn addendum to the complaint.

Orozco also submitted an unsigned request for information under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, dated June 10, 2025. The court said that document might show Shellpoint had an obligation to respond in writing and that Orozco might be entitled to damages if Shellpoint failed to do so. But it did not show that he faced imminent eviction or another irreparable injury.

Disposition

The court denied Orozco’s motion for a preliminary injunction. The order resolved only the request for preliminary relief and expressly did not address the merits of the underlying foreclosure claims.