Perla A. Hernandez v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc.;

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PERLA A. HERNANDEZ,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE,
INC.; et al.,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-15901
D.C. No. 2:15-cv-01043-GMN-
VCF
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 13, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Perla A. Hernandez appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing
her action alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
(“FDCPA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a
district court’s dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
* 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).
FILED
FEB 27 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 16-15901
Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 656 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2011).
We affirm.
The district court properly dismissed Hernandez’s FDCPA claim against
MTC Financial Inc. because the alleged communication was not an attempt to
collect a debt as defined by the FDCPA. See Ho v. ReconTrust Co., N.A., 858 F.3d
568, 572 (9th Cir. 2017) (“[A]ctions taken to facilitate a non-judicial foreclosure . .
. are not attempts to collect ‘debt’ as that term is defined by the FDCPA.”); Dowers
v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC, 852 F.3d 964, 970 (9th Cir. 2017) (explaining that
“while the FDCPA regulates security interest enforcement activity, it does so only
through Section 1692f(6),” and that “[a]s for the remaining FDCPA provisions,
‘debt collection’ refers only to the collection of a money debt”).
The district court properly dismissed Hernandez’s FDCPA claim against
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. (“Wells Fargo”) because Hernandez failed to
allege facts sufficient to show that Wells Fargo was a debt collector under the
FDCPA. See 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6)(F)(iii) (excluding from the definition of debt
collector “any person collecting . . . a debt which was not in default at the time it
was obtained by such person”).
We do not consider matters not properly raised before the district court, or
matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. See

-- 2 of 3 --

3 16-15901
Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --