JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. is, on information and belief, a national bankingassociation with headquarters in New York. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of JPMorgan Chase & Co. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. directed, controlled, formulated,and/or participated in the loan servicing activities of EMC Mortgage Corp., BearStearns Companies LLC, and Chase Home Finance LLC. JPMorgan Chase & Co.purchased the banking operations of Washington Mutual Bank (WaMu) in 2008, whileJPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., absorbed the loan servicing portfolio of WaMu.Consolidated Am. Compl. ¶¶ 45-46. Plaintiffs are citizens of California, Florida,Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, Nevada,New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Washington.
. ¶ 6.
In the context of a motion to dismiss, plaintiffs’ plausible allegations of factsare assumed to be true.
See Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
, 550 U.S. 544, 555-556 (2007).
“As a participating servicer in HAMP, Chase entered into written agreementswith its borrowers, known as Trial Period Plan (TPP) Agreements. In theseAgreements, Chase agreed to a finite ‘trial period,’ and promised that borrower2could remain in their homes while negotiating new payment terms with Chase.
On October 11, 2011, the MDL was formalized, and on March 5, 2012, Chasefiled a motion to dismiss certain claims set out in the consolidated Amended Complaint(CAC) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and failure to join necessary parties. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1), (6) &(7). The court heard oral argument on the motion to dismiss on July 12, 2012.
Plaintiffs have set out their claims under four group headings. Group 1 plaintiffsallege that Chase “systemically breached obligations set forth in form contracts that itsent to its borrowers pursuant to HAMP,”
despite the fact that plaintiffs kept their end