NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
File Name: 13a0847n.06
No. 13-1145 FILED
Sep 26, 2013
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
ANDREWS ACHEAMPONG, )
)
Plaintiff-Appellant, )
)
v. ) ON APPEAL FROM THE
) UNITED STATES DISTRICT
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Bank of New ) COURT FOR THE EASTERN
York as Trustee for the Certificate Holders of ) DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
CWABS, Inc. Asset-Backed Certificates 2006-6; )
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.; MORTGAGE )
ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., )
)
Defendants-Appellees. )
)
BEFORE: ROGERS, GRIFFIN, and DONALD, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM. After plaintiff Andrews Acheampong defaulted on his mortgage payments,
defendant Bank of New York Mellon (“BNYM”), which held an interest in the mortgage, foreclosed
on plaintiff’s property. Plaintiff brought this action in Michigan state court to invalidate the
foreclosure, and defendants removed the case to federal district court. Plaintiff alleged that BNYM
lacked standing to foreclose under Michigan law, and that BNYM fraudulently acquired its mortgage
interest. Plaintiff also alleged that defendant Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA”), which owned the
note secured by the mortgage, denied him a loan modification in violation of Michigan law, and that
BANA breached the terms of a trial modification plan it negotiated with plaintiff. Defendants
No. 13-1145
Acheampong v. Bank of New York Mellon, et al.
moved to dismiss plaintiff’s claims, and the district court granted the motion in a written opinion.
Plaintiff timely appealed.
Having thoroughly reviewed the record, the parties’ briefs, and the applicable law, we find
no error in the district court’s analysis. The reasoning supporting the judgment for defendants was
clearly and persuasively articulated by the district court, and accordingly there is no need for a
detailed written opinion by this court. Any opinion by us would be duplicative and would serve no
jurisprudential purpose. We therefore affirm the district court’s judgment for the reasons stated in
that court’s opinion.
AFFIRMED.
-2-