FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
FEB 08 2018
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: ALLANA BARONI, No. 16-56618
Debtor, D.C. No. 2:16-cv-00829-SVW
______________________________
ALLANA BARONI, MEMORANDUM*
Appellant,
v.
CIT BANK N.A., FKA OneWest Bank
FSB, FKA OneWest Bank NA,
Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Central District of California
Stephen V. Wilson, District Judge, Presiding
Submitted February 6, 2018**
San Francisco, California
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and D.W. NELSON and CHRISTEN, Circuit
Judges.
*
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).
Allana Baroni (“Baroni”) appeals the district court’s order affirming the
bankruptcy court’s summary judgment rulings in favor of CIT Bank, N.A.
(formerly known as “OneWest Bank N.A.”) (“OneWest”). We have jurisdiction
under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
1. Baroni’s note secured by a deed of trust is a “negotiable instrument”
under Cal. Com. Code § 3104(a). Yvanova v. New Century Mortg. Corp., 62 Cal.
4th 919, 927 (2016) (citing Creative Ventures, LLC v. Jim Ward & Assocs., 195
Cal. App. 4th 1430, 1445–46 (2011) (applying Commercial Code to promissory
note)). That the principal on her note may increase if she fails to pay interest does
not render the note non-negotiable. Regardless of any “interest” or additional
“charges,” Baroni agreed to pay at the very least $1.61 million—a “fixed amount
of money” pursuant § 3104(a).
2. The undisputed evidence establishes OneWest possesses Baroni’s
promissory note indorsed in blank. As the “holder of the instrument,” OneWest
may “enforce” it in this bankruptcy action. §§ 1201(b)(21)(A), 3301 (internal
quotation marks omitted); see also In re Veal, 450 B.R. 897, 910–11, 917 (B.A.P.
9th Cir. 2011) (citations and internal quotation marks omitted); In re Smith, 509
B.R. 260, 266–67 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2014) (citations omitted).
2
3. The undisputed evidence further establishes OneWest kept Baroni’s note
and the allonges executed pursuant to it in the same folder. As the allonges were
“sufficiently affixed” to the note, there is no triable issue of material fact as to
whether OneWest may enforce it. Veal, 450 B.R. at 911 n.24 (citations omitted);
see also § 3204(a).
AFFIRMED.
3