YOLANDA BUMATAY MULATO and ZOSIMA BUMATAY MULATO v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. and WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, a division of Wells Fargo Bank NA

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
YOLANDA BUMATAY MULATO and
ZOSIMA BUMATAY MULATO,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. and WELLS
FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, a division of
Wells Fargo Bank NA,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 17-15011
D.C. No. 3:14-cv-00884-NC
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
Nathanael M. Cousins, Magistrate Judge, Presiding
Submitted September 4, 2018**
San Francisco, California
Before: BERZON and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges, and DOMINGUEZ,***
District Judge.
* 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).
*** The Honorable Daniel R. Dominguez, United States District Judge for
the District of Puerto Rico, sitting by designation.
FILED
SEP 13 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Yolanda Mulato appeals from the denial of her motion to vacate a judgment
in favor of Wells Fargo. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and
we AFFIRM.
“[M]ootness by reason of settlement does not justify vacatur of a judgment
under review.” U.S. Bancorp Mortg. Co. v. Bonner Mall P’ship, 513 U.S. 18, 29
(1994). Here, Mulato voluntarily settled her claims against Wells Fargo. The
record makes clear that the settlement was neither “happenstance” nor unrelated to
this litigation. Her argument that the underlying judgment in favor of Wells Fargo
should be vacated is therefore foreclosed by U.S. Bancorp.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --