O'Hara v. U.S. Bank National Association

Background

Edward O'Hara, the appellant, filed a motion asking the court to take judicial notice under Federal Rule of Evidence 201 of six proposed adjudicative facts drawn from Securities and Exchange Commission Form 8-K filings already in the record. He also requested permission to file a supplemental brief on subject-matter jurisdiction, specifically U.S. Bank National Association's Article III standing to participate in the pending appeal.

O'Hara said the filings showed that Ocwen Financial Corporation, through Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, transferred servicing rights involving the LXS 2006-12N Trust to Home Loan Servicing Solutions, Ltd. on July 1, 2013, while Ocwen continued as subservicer. He also relied on a July 23, 2013 foreclosure-transmittal package signed by OneWest Bank, which he said authorized foreclosure in U.S. Bank's name. O'Hara argued that OneWest Bank was not identified in the cited filings as a servicer, subservicer, or party to a servicing agreement for the trust.

O'Hara maintained that the court's earlier rulings had rejected his arguments on procedural grounds and had not decided the specific standing issue he presented. He asked the court to address that issue before ruling on the appeal. These were O'Hara's arguments; the order did not adopt the proposed facts or decide whether they established a standing defect.

Court's Action

The court stated that it did not need to take judicial notice of the proposed facts at that stage. It also stated that O'Hara misunderstood the nature of standing, referred to the fact that the relevant issues were on appeal, and concluded that further briefing was neither necessary nor appropriate.

The clerk was directed to terminate the pending motion at docket entry 47 and to mail O'Hara a copy of the order at his address on record. The order did not expressly use the word "denied" for the motion. It also did not decide the merits of U.S. Bank's standing or the merits of the pending appeal.