Ralph A. Kerstetter (S.B.

#88525)
KERSTETTER LAW GROUP
1 A Professional Corporation
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
Phone (415) 462-1966
Fax (866) 259-6762

Attorney for Plaintiffs

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

)
CLAUDIA CARDINALLE, an ) Case No.
individual; and ETHAN FARID )
JINIAN, an individual )
) COMPLAINT TO SET ASIDE TRUSTEE
Plaintiffs, ) SALE, TO CANCEL TRUSTEE’S DEED,
) TO QUIET TITLE TO REAL
vs. PROPERTY, FOR ACCOUNTING AND
) REIMBURSEMENT, FOR DAMAGES,
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, ) AND FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT
a national banking association; WELLS )
FARGO BANK, a national banking )
association; FIRST AMERICAN )
LOANSTAR TRUSTEE SERVICES, )
LLC; a limited liability company; )
MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC )
REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. a )
Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 to 10, )
)
Defendants.

Plaintiffs CLAUDIA CARDINALLE, an individual; and ETHAN FARID JINIAN, an

individual, hereby allege causes of action against Defendants U.S. BANK NATIONAL

ASSOCIATION, a national banking association; WELLS FARGO BANK, a national

banking association; FIRST AMERICAN LOANSTAR TRUSTEE SERVICES, LLC; a
limited liability company (aka First American Loanstar Services, LLC); MORTGAGE
ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. a Delaware corporation; and DOES
KERSTETTER LAW GROUP
44 Montgomery Street, Suite -1–
3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
COMPLAINT
Phone (415) 462-1966
 1 to 10, as follows:
1 Plaintiffs allege:

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (To Set Aside Trustee Sale)

1. This cause of action is brought by Plaintiffs CLAUDIA CARDINALLE, an
individual; and ETHAN FARID JINIAN, an individual (collectively hereinafter “Plaintiffs”),

against U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a national banking association

(hereinafter “US Bank”); WELLS FARGO BANK, a national banking association

(hereinafter “Wells Fargo”)(aka Wells Fargo Home Loans); FIRST AMERICAN
LOANSTAR TRUSTEE SERVICES, LLC; a limited liability company organized under
the laws of Texas (aka First American Loanstar Services, LLC) (hereinafter “First
American”); MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. a
Delaware corporation; and Does 1 through 10.
2. Plaintiffs are now, and at all times relevant to this complaint were, the owner of
real property commonly known as 35 Amber Drive, in the City and County of San
Francisco, California (the “Property”). The legal description for the Property is set forth
in that Defective Trust Deed referenced in paragraph 12, below.
3. Defendant US Bank, separately and in its capacity as trustee for GSAA 2007-9,
claims to be the owner of the Property by virtue of a deed of the Property from defendant
First American dated April 20, 2010, and recorded in the Official Records of the City and
County of San Francisco, California on or about April 26, 2010 as Instrument No. 2010-
I959214.
4. Defendant U.S. Bank, and at all times mentioned in this complaint, was engaged
in the banking and mortgage lending business, and in the business of owning, separately
and as trustee for others, mortgage loans in California, including in San Francisco.
5. Defendant US Bank from at least December 31, 2007 claimed to be and
purported to act as the holder of the Note alleged in paragraph 11.

KERSTETTER LAW GROUP

44 Montgomery Street, Suite -2–
3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
COMPLAINT
Phone (415) 462-1966
 6. Defendant Wells Fargo is a national banking association doing business in the
1 State of California, and the City and County of San Francisco as national bank, and as a

mortgage loan servicer.

7. Defendant Wells Fargo, from at least December 31, 2007, claimed to be and
purported to act as loan servicer on behalf of the holder of the Note alleged in paragraph
11.
8. Defendant MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.
(hereinafter “MERS”) is a Delaware corporation not qualified to do business in the State
of California and suspended by the California Secretary of State. Defendant MERS
unlawfully conducts business in California acting as the holder of record of the beneficial
interest in at least tens of thousands of deeds of trust on California property, without
holding any interest whatsoever in the promissory note obligations purporting to be
secured thereby, and without having qualified to do business in this state.
9. Defendant MERS from at least December 31, 2007 claimed to be and purported
to act as the beneficiary of the Defective Trust Deed alleged in paragraph 12, and at no
time held any interest whatsoever in the Note..
10. Plaintiffs do not know the true names, capacities, or basis for liability of
defendants sued as Doe 1 through Doe 10. Each fictitiously named defendant is in some
manner liable to Plaintiffs, or claims some right, title, or interest in the Property, or both.
11. On or about April 19, 2007, for valuable consideration Plaintiff Claudia
Cardinalle , as borrower, made, executed, and delivered to the claimed predecessor in
interest of defendant US Bank, a written promissory note in the amount of $1,000,000.00
(the “Note”). Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that US Bank
claims to have been the holder of the Note since at least December 31, 2007.
12. On or about April 19, 2007 Plaintiff Claudia Cardinalle, as trustor, executed
and delivered a document titled as a deed of trust, naming MERS as beneficiary which
was recorded in the Official Records of the City and County of California on April 28,

KERSTETTER LAW GROUP

44 Montgomery Street, Suite -3–
3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
COMPLAINT
Phone (415) 462-1966
 2007 as instrument no. 2007-1376548-00 (the “Defective Trust Deed”)by the terms of
1 which Defendant US Bank claims to have encumbered the Property.

13. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege: On or about June
16, 2009, defendants US Bank, Wells Fargo, First American and MERS, or some of
them, caused to be recorded a notice of default and an election to sell in the Official
Records of the City and County of San Francisco, California, alleging that (a) a breach of
an obligation secured by the Defective Trust Deed had occurred, consisting of plaintiff’s
alleged failure to pay certain monthly installments of principal and interest, and (b)
defendants US Bank, Wells Fargo, First American and MERS, elected to sell, or cause to
be sold, the plaintiffs Property to satisfy that obligation. That notice of default and
election to sell was void and ineffective for each of the following reasons:
(i) that notice of default was signed only by defendant First American as agent “for
the current beneficiary” without identifying that beneficiary by name, and at a time
when the current record beneficiary of the deed of trust, defendant MERS, was not
the holder of the Note nor any obligations secured by the deed of trust, and thus
had no right under applicable law to record or serve that notice of default;
(ii) when the notice of default was recorded and served upon Plaintiffs, defendant
First American was not the trustee of record under that deed of trust. Defendant
First American did not become the trustee of record under the deed of trust until
six weeks later, on July 20, 2009, when a Substitution of Trustee form was filed in
the Official Records of the City and County of San Francisco, California; and
(iii) because the notice of default falsely identified the obligations secured by the
deed of trust as being a promissory note “in favor of Mortgage Electronic
Registrations Systems, Inc., (‘MERS’) as nominee for NL, Inc.”, when no such
obligation in favor of defendant MERS exists, nor ever existed.
14. Plaintiffs allege on information and belief that on September 17, 2009, and
thereafter, defendants US Bank, Wells Fargo, First American and MERS, published and
posted, or caused to be published and posted, at various times and in various places
KERSTETTER LAW GROUP
44 Montgomery Street, Suite -4–
3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
COMPLAINT
Phone (415) 462-1966
 certain notices of their intent to sell the Property at public auction (trustee sale).
1 purportedly to satisfy an obligation secured by the Defective Trust Deed, on grounds of

the alleged breach of the obligation, and under the power of sale in the Defective Trust
Deed. On or about April 19, 2010, Defendants US Bank, Wells Fargo, First American
and MERS, attempted and purported to sell the Property at a trustee sale as noticed,
accepted valuable consideration from defendant US Bank, and then executed and
delivered or caused to be executed and delivered a deed of the Property to defendant US
Bank.
15. That trustee sale was improperly held and the trustee’s deed wrongfully
executed, delivered, and recorded for each of the following reasons:
(a) Plaintiffs had previously entered into a legally binding enforceable agreement
with defendant Wells Fargo, as loan servicer and authorized agent of defendant US
Bank, pursuant to which agreement Plaintiffs participated in the defendants
“borrower counseling program” and on or about December 8, 2009, Plaintiffs and
defendant Wells Fargo entered into a “Trial Forebearance Agreement”, a true and
correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Pursuant to the terms of that
Trial Forebearance Agreement, if Plaintiffs successfully completed a three month
period of timely payments at an agreed amount all foreclosure activities would be
halted, and “your loan will be reviewed for a Loan Modification.” Plaintiffs did
successful complete that three month period, and timely submitted to defendant
Wells Fargo all requested documents to be considered for the promised review for
a Loan Modification. Under all criteria specified in applicable federal and state
law that Loan Modification should have been approved. During this time period,
Plaintiffs repeatedly followed up with Wells Fargo by telephone and fax to ensure
all required information was in the hands of Wells Fargo, and that all additional
requests for information would be promptly responded to. However, defendant
Wells Fargo (i) repeatedly lost or misplaced the information and documents
submitted and resubmitted by Plaintiffs; and (ii) in the course of that review for a
KERSTETTER LAW GROUP
44 Montgomery Street, Suite -5–
3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
COMPLAINT
Phone (415) 462-1966
 Loan Modification, defendant Wells Fargo and defendant US Bank considered
1 income information about Plaintiffs which was erroneous (understating Plaintiffs
true income by approximately $15,000 per month) and inconsistent with the true
and accurate income documentation submitted, repeatedly, by Plaintiffs to
defendant Wells Fargo. Based upon the incomplete and erroneous information
considered by defendants Wells Fargo and US Bank, in turn due to their poor
record-keeping, and mishandling of such information, the Loan Modification was
wrongfully denied by letter dated April 6, 2010, wherein it states “You have not
been approved for a mortgage loan modification because we were unable to get
you to a modified payment amount you could afford per the investor guidelines on
your mortgage.”. When Plaintiffs followed up about the denial with Wells Fargo
by telephone during the period of April 7 to April 19, 2010, Plaintiffs were told
that Wells Fargo was still using the erroneous $15,000 understated monthly
income amount, and Plaintiffs demanded it be corrected. The Wells Fargo
representatives responsible for handling Plaintiffs’ calls informed Plaintiffs that
they did not know where the erroneous figures used by Wells Fargo came from,
but they had no authority to correct them. Those same Wells Fargo representatives
instructed Plaintiffs on April 8, 2010 to resubmit the information and to request
reconsideration, which Plaintiffs did that same day via fax. On April 9, 2010 the
Wells Fargo representatives confirmed they had received all requested
documentation, and on April 15, 2010 confirmed to Plaintiffs that the request for
reconsideration was being reviewed. A follow-up call to Wells Fargo on Friday,
April 16, 2010 confirmed this, but the Wells Fargo representatives again stated
they were using the prior erroneous income figure, understated by $15,000 per
month. Plaintiffs again demanded that Wells Fargo make a correction. Plaintiffs
again submitted correct information on Monday April 19, 2010, and yet again
called Wells Fargo on April 20, 2010. On that date, the Wells Fargo
representatives said to Plaintiffs “Sorry, its too late. Your property was foreclosed
KERSTETTER LAW GROUP
44 Montgomery Street, Suite -6–
3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
COMPLAINT
Phone (415) 462-1966
 and sold yesterday.” Defendants Wells Fargo, US Bank, and First American at no
1 time during the prior six months of discussions with Plaintiffs, informed Plaintiffs
that the foreclosure sale date had been rescheduled, or was imminent. Instead,
defendant Wells Fargo, as loan servicer and on behalf of defendant US Bank, by
its actions and statements lead Plaintiffs to believe that Plaintiffs’ applications for
a Loan Modification should be submitted and would fairly and timely be
considered. This was false. This entire series of activities by defendants Wells
Fargo and US Bank are a breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing
applicable to all contracts in California, are a violation of the standards applicable
to consideration of loan modifications by lenders under applicable federal and state
law (including, without limitation, the California Foreclosure Prevention Act the
Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and the Federal Making Home
Affordable Program.)
(b) For the reasons stated in paragraph 13, above, the notice of default published
by Defendant MTC FINANCIAL, INC., a California corporation, (dba TRUSTEE
CORPS), was void, and cannot be relied upon as the basis for the purported trustee
sale conducted by Defendants.
(c) Defendant US Bank was not a bona fide purchaser at the purported trustee sale
for each of the following reasons:
(i) such defendant had actual and constructive knowledge that the notice of
default upon which the foreclosure sale was purportedly authorized was
void, based upon its knowledge as the claimed holder of the Note;
(ii) Defendant US Bank, prior to the purported trustee sale, had actual
and/or constructive knowledge of all or some significant portion of the
allegations set forth in paragraphs 13 and 15(a), above, and participated in
the bidding at such purported sale irrespective of such transgressions.
All of the foregoing facts alleged in this paragraph 15 resulted in the purported loss by
Plaintiffs of clear fee title to the Property, and other losses and damages in the form of
KERSTETTER LAW GROUP
44 Montgomery Street, Suite -7–
3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
COMPLAINT
Phone (415) 462-1966
 loss of use of the Property, inability to gain the benefit of Plaintiff’s equity in such
1 Property, and other damages, according to proof.

16. Plaintiffs hereby offer to tender to Defendants (as their interest may appear) all
amounts previously and rightfully claimed by such Defendants to be due and owing so
that the claimed default may be cured (subject to implementation of the Loan
Modification Agreement referenced herein) and Plaintiff may be reinstated to all former
rights and privileges under the Note and deed of trust as so modified.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (To Cancel Trustee’s Deed)

17. This cause of action is brought by Plaintiffs CLAUDIA CARDINALLE, an
individual; and ETHAN FARID JINIAN, an individual (collectively hereinafter “Plaintiffs”),

against U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a national banking association

(hereinafter “US Bank”); WELLS FARGO BANK, a national banking association

(hereinafter “Wells Fargo”)(aka Wells Fargo Home Loans); FIRST AMERICAN
LOANSTAR TRUSTEE SERVICES, LLC; a limited liability company organized under
the laws of Texas (aka First American Loanstar Services, LLC) (hereinafter “First
American”); MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. a
Delaware corporation; and Does 1 through 10.
18. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the allegations in paragraphs 2
through 16.
19. Defendant US Bank claims an estate or interest in the Property adverse to that
of Plaintiffs, but such defendant’s claims are without any right; and such defendant has
no estate, right, title, or interest in the Property.
20. The claims of defendant US Bank to the Property are based on the trustee’s
deed described in paragraph14.
21. Although such deed is purported to be valid on its face, it is invalid, void and
voidable, and of no force or effect regarding Plaintiff’s interests in the Property, for the
reasons set forth in paragraph 15.
KERSTETTER LAW GROUP
44 Montgomery Street, Suite -8–
3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
COMPLAINT
Phone (415) 462-1966
 22. The interest or estate in the described Property claimed by Defendant US
1 Bank, based on the trustee’s deed, is a cloud on Plaintiffs’ title in and to the Property,

tends to depreciate its market value, restricts Plaintiffs’ full use and enjoyment of the
Property, and hinders Plaintiffs’ right to unrestricted alienation of it. If the trustee’s deed
is not canceled Plaintiffs will suffer serious additional injury and damages.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (To Quiet Title to Real Property)

23. This cause of action is brought by Plaintiffs CLAUDIA CARDINALLE, an
individual; and ETHAN FARID JINIAN, an individual (collectively hereinafter “Plaintiffs”),

against U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a national banking association

(hereinafter “US Bank”); WELLS FARGO BANK, a national banking association

(hereinafter “Wells Fargo”)(aka Wells Fargo Home Loans); FIRST AMERICAN
LOANSTAR TRUSTEE SERVICES, LLC; a limited liability company organized under
the laws of Texas (aka First American Loanstar Services, LLC) (hereinafter “First
American”); MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. a
Delaware corporation; and Does 1 through 10.
24. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the allegations in paragraphs 2
through 16 and 19 through 22.
25. Plaintiffs seeks to quiet title to the Property against all claims of all
defendants. Defendants’ claims are without any right, and defendants have no right, title,
estate, lien, or interest in the Property.
26. Plaintiffs name as defendants in this action all persons unknown claiming (a)
any legal or equitable right, title, estate, lien, or interest in the property described in the
complaint adverse to plaintiffs’ title, or (b) any cloud on plaintiffs’ title to the Property.
The claims of each unknown defendant are without any right, and these defendants have
no right, title, estate, lien, or interest in the Property.
27. Plaintiffs desire and are entitled to a judicial declaration quieting title to the
Property in Plaintiffs as of April 19, 2010, and restoring sole possession to Plaintiffs.
KERSTETTER LAW GROUP
44 Montgomery Street, Suite -9–
3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
COMPLAINT
Phone (415) 462-1966
 1 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Accounting)
28. This cause of action is brought by Plaintiffs CLAUDIA CARDINALLE, an
individual; and ETHAN FARID JINIAN, an individual (collectively hereinafter “Plaintiffs”),

against U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a national banking association

(hereinafter “US Bank”); WELLS FARGO BANK, a national banking association

(hereinafter “Wells Fargo”)(aka Wells Fargo Home Loans); FIRST AMERICAN
LOANSTAR TRUSTEE SERVICES, LLC; a limited liability company organized under
the laws of Texas (aka First American Loanstar Services, LLC) (hereinafter “First
American”); MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. a
Delaware corporation; and Does 1 through 10.
29. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the allegations in paragraphs 1
through 16, 19 through 22 and 25 through 27.
30. The amount of money (if any) owed to defendants, and each of them, is
unknown to Plaintiffs and cannot be determined without an accounting.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Breach of Contract)

31. This cause of action is brought by Plaintiffs CLAUDIA CARDINALLE, an
individual; and ETHAN FARID JINIAN, an individual (collectively hereinafter “Plaintiffs”),

against U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a national banking association

(hereinafter “US Bank”); WELLS FARGO BANK, a national banking association

(hereinafter “Wells Fargo”)(aka Wells Fargo Home Loans); MORTGAGE
ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. a Delaware corporation; and Does 1
through 10.
32. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference the allegations in paragraphs 1
through 16, 19 through 22 and 25 through 27.

KERSTETTER LAW GROUP

44 Montgomery Street, Suite - 10 –
3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
COMPLAINT
Phone (415) 462-1966
 33. The Note, the Defective Trust Deed, and the Trial Forebearance Agreement
1 constitute contractual agreements between Plaintiffs and Defendants US Bank,Wells

Fargo, and MERS, binding and enforceable under California law.

34. Defendants US Bank, Wells Fargo and MERS. breached all such contractual
agreements with Plaintiffs by failing to observe the covenant of good faith and fair
dealing thereunder by reason of each and every allegation set forth or referenced in
paragraph 13 and 15(a), above.
35. By reason of such breaches by Defendants US Bank, Wells Fargo and MERS,
Plaintiffs suffered damages in an amount not less than $1,500,000.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff demands judgment as follows:

A. That the Court issue (a) a declaration that the trustee sale of the Property is null
and void and of no force or effect, and (b) an order setting aside the trustee sale of the
Property.
B. That the Court (a) issue an order that Defendant US Bank deliver the trustee’s
deed to the Court, and (b) cancel the trustee’s deed.
C. That the Court order judgment quieting title in Plaintiffs names as owners of the
Property, declaring that each and every defendant has no right, title, estate, lien, or
interest in the Property adverse to Plaintiffs and ordering that Plaintiffs be restored to sole
possession of the real property.
D. That the Court render between Plaintiffs, and Defendants, an accounting
determining the amount, if any, actually owed to Defendants by Plaintiffs.
E. That the Court award damages for the wrongful conduct of Defendants, and for
the breach of contract alleged herein, according to proof at trial.
F. That Plaintiffs recover all attorney fees and costs in this action.
G. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem proper.

Respectfully submitted:
KERSTETTER LAW GROUP
44 Montgomery Street, Suite - 11 –
3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
COMPLAINT
Phone (415) 462-1966
 DATED: May 28, 2010 ___________________________________
1 Ralph A. Kerstetter
KERSTETTER LAW GROUP
counsel for Plaintiffs

KERSTETTER LAW GROUP

44 Montgomery Street, Suite - 12 –
3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
COMPLAINT
Phone (415) 462-1966
 VERIFICATION BY PARTY
1

State of California )
) ss.
County of San Francisco )

I, the undersigned, certify and declare that I have read the foregoing COMPLAINT and know its

contents. I am a plaintiff in this action, and aver that the matters stated in said document are true

of my own knowledge, except as to the matters which are therein stated on information or belief,

and as to those matters I believe them to be true.

Executed on May 28, 2010, at San Francisco, California.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is

true and correct.

___________________________________
CLAUDIA CARDINALLE

KERSTETTER LAW GROUP

44 Montgomery Street, Suite - 13 –
3850
San Francisco, CA 94104
COMPLAINT
Phone (415) 462-1966