Masterson v. CWALT Et Al

Case 2:18-cv-08929-DDP-PLA Document 1 Filed 10/16/18 Page 1 of 164 Page ID #:1
COMPLAINT ~~ f ~co~
rt
1 DANIEL MASTERSON
BIJOU PHILLIPS ~ OCT 16 20i8
;~
2 2151 HOLLYRIDGE DRIVE
~' MTRAL DIS
((' 3
HOLLYWOOD, CA 90068 ~; ~ ~ ~~ Of CAL . 0
~~
Phone: (323) 864-0778 ~----
,
1 4 masterson.holl,~ridge(a~hotmail.com t
~l Plaintiffs Pro Se ; ' ~`' ' ~ ~0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~„~
f ~_.,_---,--- _____~._ __.
~~ (.18k'K ~ _. i i,GUI"~
_ 12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

s CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
L
a E
9 WESTERN DIVISION
~.
.~
~o 10
a o~ O) 11 01118 -89 ~9 -~~w ~~
C
0 a -o DANIEL MASTERSON and
U'T
i
12 BIJOU PHILLIPS Case No.
o°
R c Ot Plaintiffs
►
~ _0
w ~
o ~, 13
_~ vs.
>~ 14 COMPLAINT FOR:
~~ CWALT, INC.; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC
~w 15
-~ REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.; THE 1. DECLARATORY RELIEF
;
~ BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON fka THE COUNTS 1-105 [28 U.S.C.
~~ o~
_~ BANK OF NEW YORK as TRUSTEE for the
a
0 ~~
16
CWALT, INC. ALTERNATNE LOAN
§§ 2201, 22021;
y
NM
N
M 17 TRUST 2007-19, MORTGAGE PASS- 2. NEGLIGENT
THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2007- MISREPRESENTATION
J
W 18 19; THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON
.~ flca THE BANK OF NEW YORK as AND DECEIT COUNTS 1-
A 19 TRUSTEE for the CWALT, INC. 104;
ALTERNATIVE LOAN TRUST 2005-56,
MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH 3. VIOLATION OF
20
CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-56; THE CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE
21 BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON flca THE § 1095, ET SEQ;
BANK OF NEW YORK as TRUSTEE for the
22 CWALT, INC. ALTERNATIVE LOAN 4. VIOLATION OF
TRUST 2006-6CB, MORTGAGE PASS- CALIFORNIA BUSINESS
23 THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-
6CB; THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON AND PROFESSIONAL CODE
24 flca THE BANK OF NEW YORK as SECTION 17200, ET SEQ.;
TRUSTEE for the CWALT, INC.
ALTERNATIVE LOAN TRUST 2005-62, 5. VIOLATION OF 15 U.S.C. §
25 1692 ET SEQ.;
MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH
26 CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-62; THE 6. VIOLATION OF 15 U.S.C. §
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON fka THE
BANK OF NEW YORK as TRUSTEE for the 1641(g);
27
CWALT, INC. ALTERNATIVE LOAN 8. CANCELLATION OF
TRUST 2006-39CB, MORTGAGE PASS-
28 INSTRUMENTS;
THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-

39CB; THE BANK OF NEW YORK
l MELLON fka THE BANK OF NEW YORK as
TRUSTEE for the CWALT,INC.
2 ALTERNATIVE LOAN TRUST 2007-SCB,
MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH
3 CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2007-SCB; THE
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON fka THE
4 BANK OF NEW YORK as TRUSTEE for the
CWALT,INC. ALTERNATIVE LOAN
5 TRUST 2007-8CB, MORTGAGE PASS-
THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2007-
6 8CB; ROES 1-10 and DOES 1-10, inclusive,
representing a class of unknown persons who
7 claim or have the right to claim an interest in
certain real property located in Los Angeles,
8 California,
0
L
°" I ~ 9 Defendants
.
~
~R
~ 10
ap O
a o~
11
U
///
~0
gt 12 ~~~
~~
~ ~ ///
a =y
13
///
'- @•E
a o 14 ///
~ ~~ ~~~
.., -~~W 15
as T~ ~ ///
~ _~ a ///
o ~~ 16
N~ ^7 ///
V 1/
///
J
;
.~, ~ 18 ///
///
A 19
///
20 ///
///
21
///
22 ///
///
23
///
24 ///
///
25
///
26 ///
///
27
///
28
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT.....................................................................................- 2 -
2
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE ......................................................................................- 4 -
3
III. THE PARTIES .................................................................................................................- 5 -
4 IV. NATURE AND SUMMARY OF THE ACTION ..........................................................- 9 -
5 V. GENERAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS ...................................................................- 11 -
6 a) ALLEGATIONS PERTAINING TO ASSIGNMENT REFERENCED

AS INSTRUMENT NO.20101905145 ..........................................................- 11
7
b) SECURITIZATION .......................................................................................- 16 -
8 FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 1.
•..................................................................- 131 -
0
~" ~ 9 DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 2"DOES THE LOAN BEING IN DEFAULT
::, ~ AT THE TIME OF THE ASSIGNMENT(S),IDENTIFIED IN ATTACHED
'~ ~ o~ 10 EXHIBITS 2-105 CONFLICT WITH ....................................................................- 134 -
°" ~ U
11 DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 3"DID THE VALUE OF ...................................- 136 -
L V T DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 4"DO THE ASSIGNMENTS IDENTIFIED IN
~: ~0 12
gt
~~ ATTACHED EXHIBITS 2-105 COMPLY WITH THE "TIMING
a =~ 13 REQUIREMENT" OF 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G?"...............................................- 139 -
DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 5"DO THE ASSIGNMENTS IDENTIFIED IN
'
a o ~•~ 14 ATTACHED EXHIBITS 2-105 CONVEY "QUALIFIED LOANS" as defined
~ ~~
.°~ -~
~w 15 by 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G~"..................................................................................- 141
as T~ °°
DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 6"ARE THE ASSIGNMENTS IDENTIFIED
~ _~ 16
y ~ OD IN ATTACHED EXHIBITS 2-105 "DEFECTIVE OBLIGATIONS"
~ N~
y ~ 17 PURSUANT TO 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G?"..........................................................- 143 -

J DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 7"DO THE ASSIGNMENTS ............................- 145 -
;
.~, ~ 18
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION ..........................................................................................- 148 _
A 19
DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 8"DO THE DELIVERY AND/OR
20 TRANSFERS OF THE NOTES IDENTIFIED IN ATTACHED EXHIBITS 2-
105 YEARS AFTER THE TRUSTS' CLOSING DATES RENDER THE
21 REMIC STATUS OF THE TRUSTS VOID PURSUANT TO 26 U.S.C.§§
860A-860G?» .............................................................................................................- 148 -
22
(against Defendants BONY,CWALT,and Associates in Fact)........................................- 148 -
23
CONCLUSION .....................................................................................................................- 150 -
24 PRAYER FOR RELIEF.......................................................................................................- 151 -
25
26
27
28
COMPLAINT 9/10/2018
1
1 NOW COME Plaintiffs Daniel Masterson and Bijou Phillips, (Plaintiffs) by

2 and for their Complaint against Defendants CWALT, Inc.; Mortgage
3 Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.; The Bank of New York Mellon FKA
4 The Bank of New York as Trustee for the CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan
5 Trust 2007-19, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-19; The

6 Bank of New York Mellon FKA The Bank of New York as Trustee for the
7 CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2005-56, Mortgage Pass-Through
~, g Certificates, Series 2005-56; The Bank of New York Mellon FKA The Bank
0
L
a ~ 9 of New York as Trustee for the CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2006-
~+ ~f0
~ E 10 6CB, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-6CB; The Bank of
•'~ (pL
gy
a ~~
11 New York Mellon FKA The Bank of New York as Trustee for the CWALT,
L ~v
+°+ ~ 0 12
gt Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2005-62, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
~~
13 Series 2005-62; The Bank of New York Mellon FKA The Bank of New York
_~
'
a
~~ ..
o ~•E 14
as Trustee for the CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2006-39CB,
~ o,E
.~~ .~w 15 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-39CB; The Bank of New
as T~-
~ _~ 16 York Mellon FKA The Bank of New York as Trustee for the CWALT, Inc.
y ~W
~ NM
N 17 Alternative Loan Trust 2007-SCB, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
~ v
J
w 18 Series 2007-SCB; The Bank of New York Mellon FKA The Bank of New
.~
A 19 York as Trustee for the CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2007-8CB,
20 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-8CB; ROES 1-10 and
21 DOES 1-10, inclusive, representing a class of unknown persons who claim or
22 have the right to claim an interest in certain real property located in
23 Hollywood, California (collectively,"Defendants"), aver as follows:
24 ///
25 ///
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
- 1-
1 I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
2
3 1. Plaintiffs had extensive research conducted into documents filed in the Los
4 Angeles County Recorder's Office in connection with Plaintiffs' home, the
5 real property, commonly known as 2151 Hollyridge Drive, Hollywood,
~i California 90068. While reviewing the aforementioned documents, Plaintiffs
7 were appalled to see that several documents contained information that was
g known to be false or should have be known to be false by the Defendants.
0
'° ~ 9 Plaintiffs filed a complaint' with this Court that was dismissed pursuant to
~
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) with
'~ ~ oE 10
o
. o~
11 prejudice. Plaintiffs appealed the District Court's Ruling to the United States
U'T
w ~0
gr 12 Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit2 who affirmed the Motion to Dismiss
y
a = ~, 13 pursuant to FRCP 12(b)(6) but reversed the Motion to Dismiss pursuant to
'
a oE 14 FRCP 12(b)(1) holding that the District Court erred in dismissing Plaintiffs'
~ °~ E
.~~ -~ Complaint with prejudice and remanded the case back to the lower court to
i~ T~~W
~ 15
~ _~ 16 correct the order to show without prejudice3. In preparation of the instant
y ~~
~ N~
N I7 case it was discovered that the Defendants had a pattern and practice of
J
w 18 filing documents containing information that is known to be false, or that
.~
A 19 should have been known to be false by the Defendants. Defendants then
used these fatally flawed documents to make Negligent Misrepresentations
21 and conduct ultra wires acts involving, inter alia, blatant violations of
22 Internal Revenue Code and Securities Laws. These ultra wires acts were
23 committed by both Defendant Bank of New York Mellon flca The Bank of
24 New York (hereinafter "BONY") as well as the other Defendants upon the
25 REMIC Trusts that Defendant BONY is Trustee. Defendant CWALT,Inc is
26
27 1 see Masterson v. Bank of New York Mellon 2:14-cv-08741-DDP-AJW (ECF No. 1)

2 see United States Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit 16-55277
28 3 see United States Court of Appeals for Ninth Circuit Case: 16-55277, 05/17/2017, ID:
10437626, DktEntry: 20-1
-2-
1 the "Depositor" for all of the REMIC Trusts the Defendant BONY is the
2 Trustee for in the instant case and responsible for all of the loans, in the
3 subject REMIC Trusts, to be deposited, conveyed, and transferred to
4 Defendant BONY in compliance with the Internal Revenue Code and
5 Securities Laws. Defendant Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.
6 (hereinafter "MERS") has facilitated the aforementioned ultra wires acts.
7 Defendants' complete and total violation of the Internal Revenue Code and
8 Securities Laws, that Defendant BONY has failed correct, have exposed
0
a E 9 Defendants to countless billions of dollars in fines and penalties. Defendant
8
.~
w
.~
C
~oE lO
MERS is a wholly owned subsidiary of MERSCORP Holdings, Inc., and
a o~
a ~
rn ~ 11 Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. is the majority stockholder of MERSCORP
0 Qv
U'T
00 12 Holdings, Inc. as Plaintiffs are stockholders in both the Defendant the
oL
►~ ~.
o ~, 13 BONY and the Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. Plaintiffs' investments are in
=N
N
'E 14 jeopardy as a result of Defendants' actions giving Plaintiffs and irrefutable

~~
;
~~W 15 standing for relief. Completely separate but in addition to the standing
as o~
_~
_~ Plaintiffs have, as stockholders, one of the fatally flawed assignments that
a
0 ~~ 16
y
i~ NM
y M 1~ was recorded containing information that is known to be false, or that should
,
. 18 have been known to be false by the Defendants, is associated with Plaintiffs'
A 19 home, the real property, commonly known as 2151 Hollyridge Drive,
20 Hollywood, California 90068. Plaintiffs aver that the fatally flawed
21 assignments that were recorded containing information that is known to be
22 false, or that should have been known to be false by the Defendants are not
23 merely voidable but in fact void ab inito. The Negligent Misrepresentations
24 and Deceit by all the Defendants and the ultra wires acts in violation of the
25 Internal Revenue Code and Securities Laws are the basis for the case at bar.
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
- 3-
1 II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2
3 I~ This Court has original jurisdiction over the claims in this action based on 28
4 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, 15 U.S.C. § 1641, 12 U.S.C. §
5 2605 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 which confers original jurisdiction on federal
6 district courts in suits to address the deprivation of rights secured by federal
7 law.
S
0
a ~ 9 3. This Court has original jurisdiction over the claims in this action based on 18
~.3
C
~R
E lO U.S.C. §§1964-et seq., §§1962(a-d); See also 17 CFR 10(b)-5.
nr O
C ~ ~ 11
rn ~
O Q -o
L
U'T
00 12
at This Court also has supplemental jurisdiction over the pendant state law
.
~ ~,
_ ~ 13 claims because they form a part of the same case or controversy under
N
f0
'E 14 Article III ofthe United States Constitution, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
~~ ~~
.;,~
~W 15
as _ ~
o~
_~
a . ~~ 16 5. This Court has original jurisdiction over the claims in this action based on 28
0y
iw NM 7 ~7
y ~rj 1 / U.S.C. § 1332 which confers original jurisdiction on federal district courts in
suits between diverse citizens that involve an amount in controversy in
,
. ~ 10
A 19 excess of $250,000.
20
21 C.'7 This Court has original jurisdiction over the claims in this action based on
22 and/or in connection to Revised regulations and Title 26 §§860(A-G) et.,
23 seq.
24
25 ~• This Court has original jurisdiction over the claims in this action based on
26 federal questions pursuant to and governed under the Securities Act of 1933
27 [as amended through P.L. 112-106, approved April 5, 2012].

28 ///
- 4-
1 II III. THE PARTIES

2
3 ~ ~ Plaintiffs are now, and at all times mentioned herein, individuals residing in
4 the Los Angeles County, in the State of California. At all times relevant to
5 this action, Plaintiffs have owned the real property commonly known as
6 2151 Holly Ridge Drive, Hollywood, California 90068 (hereinafter the
7 "Property").
8
0
L
a E 9 Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
~8
.
C
.~ ~
Gp O
1~ beliefs, asserts that at all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant
~ a,
~r O ff
,
C ~ ~ 11 CWALT, Inc. (hereinafter "CWALT") was the Depositor of the CWALT,

0 Qv
U T
i
00 12
0L
Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2007-19, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
R c
L ~ 0
Series 2007-19; the CWALT, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2005-56,
_~ 13
'E 14 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-56; the CWALT, Inc.,

°~ E
~w 15 Alternative Loan Trust 2006-6CB, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
PQ T~
Or
= O
Lri 16 Series 2006-6CB; the CWALT, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2005-62,
0 ~~
y ~~
1n NM
h M 17 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-62; the CWALT, Inc.,
~ 10 Alternative Loan Trust 2006-39CB, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,

,
.
~~ 19 Series 2006-39CB; the CWALT, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2007-SCB,
20 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-SCB; the CWALT, Inc.,
21 Alternative Loan Trust 2007-8CB, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
22 Series 2007-8CB; is a Delaware corporation whose registered agent is

23 located at 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, DE 19801.
24
25 10. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
26 beliefs, asserts that at all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant
27 Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (hereinafter "MERS") is a
28 private electronic database that tracks the transfer of ownership interests in
- 5-
1 mortgage loans and does not hold any actual beneficial loans in its portfolio
2 and is organized and existing under the Laws of Delaware, and whose
3 registered agent is located at 1209 Orange Street, Wilmington, DE 19801.
4
5 1 1. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
6 beliefs aver, that at all relevant times to this Complaint, Defendant THE
7 BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON FKA THE BANK OF NEW YORK
8 (hereinafter "BONY") as Trustee for the CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan
0
a ~ 9 Trust 2007-19, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-19,
8
.~
wG
.R E lO (hereinafter "2007-19 Trust") is based in New York, New York with
OD O
~ a,
a
O
~ ~ 11 corporate headquarters located at 1 Wall St., New York, New York 10286.
0 a -~
U'T
00 12
R OL
~c
— N
~, 13 12. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
y
N @
~= E 14 beliefs aver, that at all relevant times to this Complaint, Defendant BONY as
~~
; ~°~ E 15
-~~w Trustee for the CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2005-56, Mortgage
as or
=o
16 Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-56, (hereinafter "2005-56 Trust") is
0 ~~
NM ~7
h M 1 / based in New York, New York with corporate headquarters located at 1
,
. ~ 10 Wall St., New York, New York 10286.
'
_ 19
21 beliefs aver, that at all relevant times to this Complaint, Defendant BONY as
22 Trustee for the CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2006-6CB, Mortgage
23 Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-6CB, (hereinafter "2006-6CB
24 Trust") is based in New York, New York with corporate headquarters
25 located at 1 Wall St., New York, New York 10286.
26
-6-
1 Trustee for the CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2005-62, Mortgage
2 Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-62, (hereinafter "2005-62 Trust") is
3 based in New York, New York with corporate headquarters located at 1
4 Wall St., New York, New York 10286.
5
8 Trustee for the CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2006-39CB, Mortgage
0
L
a E 9 Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-39CB, (hereinafter "2006-39CB
8
.~
C
~ 10 Trust") is based in New York, New York with corporate headquarters
~R Op O
a a~
C ~~
O) 11 located at 1 Wall St., New York, New York 10286.
O Q~
i U'T
r~i p~ 12
CC Ot
c
►
~ ~ 16. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
_ ~y 13
~~
' E 14 beliefs aver, that at all relevant times to this Complaint, Defendant BONY as
~ ~ ~~~
-~~W
; ~ 15 Trustee for the CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2007-SCB, Mortgage
or
_~ 16 Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-SCB, (hereinafter "2007-SCB
0 ~~
~ ~ NM
+~i
y M 17 Trust") is based in New York, New York with corporate headquarters
/-~
located at 1 Wall St., New York, New York 10286.
.~ ~ 10
A 19
22 Trustee for the CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2007-SCB, Mortgage
23 Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-SCB, (hereinafter "2007-8CB
24 Trust") is based in New York, New York with corporate headquarters
25 located at 1 Wall St., New York, New York 10286.
26
27 18. Plaintiffs are ignorant of the true identity and capacity of Defendants
28 designated as Roes 1-10 and Does 1-10, inclusive, representing a class of
- 7-
1 unknown persons who claim or have the right to claim an interest in certain
2 real property located in Hollywood, California but will amend the Complaint
3 when their identities have been ascertained according to proof within the
4 time permitted. However, Plaintiffs allege on information and belief, that

5 each and every Doe Defendant is in some manner responsible for the acts
6 and conduct of the other Defendants, and were, and are, responsible for the
7 injuries, damages and harm incurred by Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs further allege
8 on information and belief that each such designated Defendant acted, and
~' ~ 9 acts, as the authorized agent, representative and associate of the other
..
~' E 10 Defendants in doing the things alleged herein.
~R aD O
a ~V
11
o av
~` V `>.
+~+ ~ O 12 19. Whenever reference is made in this Complaint to any act of any
'v OL
r~ ~C
1G N
o ;, 13 Defendant(s), that allegation shall mean that each Defendant acted
=N
' o @~E 14 individually and jointly with the other Defendants.

a
~ °~ E
.~ emu' 1 S
as T~-
~ _~ 16 20. Any allegation about acts of any corporate or other business Defendants)
o ~~
~ NM
y M 17 means that the corporation or other business performed the acts alleged
J
~ 18 through its officers, directors, employees, agents and/or representatives
.~
A 19 while they were acting within the actual or ostensible scope of their
20 authority.
21
23 belief, that at all relevant times, each Defendant committed the acts, caused
24 or directed others to commit the acts, or permitted others to commit the acts
25 alleged in this Complaint. Additionally, some or all of the Defendants acted
26 as the agent of the other Defendants, and all of the Defendants acted within
27 the scope of their agency if acting as an agent of the other.
28 ///
-8-
1 IV. NATURE AND SUMMARY OF THE ACTION

2
3 22. Home ownership is not merely the largest and primary investment for many
4 Americans, it is also the bedrock of the American Dream. The equity in a
5 home allows people to provide a college education for their children,
6 supports them in retirement, and provides financial support during difficult

7 economic times. Though designed to streamline the foreclosure process and
8 unburden the courts, the Non-Judicial Foreclosure Scheme adopted by
0
L
a E 9 California was never designed to insulating Wall Street from unlawfully and
8
.~
w
fraudulent acts. In addition to California Statutes, the underlying fraudulent
~o 10
._
a o~
o ~,
c rn ~ 11 acts by Defendants, have inseverable connection to New York Trust Law,
O Qv
U'T
o~ 12 Federal Securities Law and Internal Revenue Code.
H
oL
3C
S
.y
o ~, 13
=N
(0
>E
~~
°'W beliefs aver, that at its core, this case involves a series of violations and
~_~n 15
~: o~
_~ 16 deceptive acts, by Defendants, that irrefutably establishes a Pattern and
0 ~~
h
Fr NM
y
y
N
M 17 Practice that Defendants have committed in conflict with that of Internal
CC
►
~ J
W 18 Revenue Codes, Securities and Exchange Commission Statutes, Uniform
.~
-, 19 Commercial Code, and California Revised Statutes, all of which are matters
20 of public policy and do not require special standing to assert. Plaintiffs assert
21 that the Defendants' violations of the aforementioned public policies are
22 deceptive, fraudulent, and possibly felonious.
23
24 24. Though not in default now or at any time relevant to the instant case,
25 Plaintiffs were at one time, in 2010, delinquent on their mortgage payment.
26 In an attempt to appear to be in compliance with the Non-Judicial
27 Foreclosure Scheme adopted by California, Defendants recorded, or caused
28 to be recorded, a "Corporate Assignment of Deed of Trust" in the Los
- 9-
1 Angeles County Recorder's Office on December 23, 2010 as Instrument No.

2 20101905145, purporting to transferal all beneficial interest in Plaintiffs'
3 Deed of Trust and Note to the CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2007-
4 19, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-19.

5
6 25. The aforementioned assignment, although part of the Plaintiffs' claims, is
7 only a small part of the heart of the controversy in the case at bar. The
8 gravamen of the instant complaint is Plaintiffs have identified over 100(one

0
L
a $ 9 hundred) fatally flawed assignments of Mortgages and Deeds of Trusts into
~~~
c 10 Mortgage Back Securities that undeniably establishes not only a Pattern and
'w o00
Q+ o~
0 11 Practice of numerous violations of Internal Revenue Codes, Securities and
cam,' V >,
~o
of 12 Exchange Commission Statutes but also acts as prima facie evidence of the
R ~c
— ~
13 recordation of documents in local county recorder's offices containing
a =N
>E
14 known false information, or information that should have be known be
a o`
~ ~E
o -~ w
.~ 15 Defendants to have been false, in direct violation of Uniform Commercial
T~
O~ = O
16 Code, and California Revised Statutes.
o ~~
~ NM
~ N
v 17
J
W 18
26. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
.~
A 19
beliefs aver, that the ultra vires acts committed by Defendant MERS
20
combined with the ultra vires acts committed by Defendant BONY and
21
Defendant BONY's failure to take action to correct the ultra wires acts
22
committed by others unto federally regulated trusts that Defendant BONY is
23
the Trustee has exposed Defendants MERS and BONY to untold billions of
24
dollars in fines and penalties.
25
27. As Plaintiffs are stockholders, having a direct interest in both Defendants
26
MERS and BONY Plaintiffs' investments are in jeopardy as a result of
27
Defendants' actions Plaintiffs have unquestionable standing for relief.
28
- 10-
1 V. GENERAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

2
3 a) ALLEGATIONS PERTAINING TO ASSIGNMENT REFERENCED

AS INSTRUMENT NO.20101905145
4
5
6
belief, that at all relevant times, each Defendant knew or realized that the
7
other Defendants were engaging in or planned to engage in the violations of
8
law alleged in this Complaint. Knowing or realizing that the other
~ 9
.~8 Defendants were engaging in or planning to engage in unlawful conduct,
~oE 10 each Defendant nevertheless facilitated the commission of those unlawful
o~
~ ~ 11
a
UT
-~ acts. Each Defendant intended to and did encourage, facilitate, or assist in
00 12
~L
~. the commission of the unlawful acts, and thereby aided and abetted the other
N
=Y 13
N
f6 Defendants in the unlawful conduct.
'E 14
°~ E
.-~
;,~
~w 15
_~ 29. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
,.-: on
_~
a ~~ 16
0
Nj
~.
belief, that Defendants have unlawfully attempted transfers, assignments and
y 17
►
~ J o
endorsements of the Note and Deed of Trust to which the Defendants claim
.~
~: ~ ~O
the beneficial rights and interests. As discussed below, the Defendants'
A 19
claimed interest is false.
20
21
30. Plaintiffs executed a promissory note (hereinafter "Note") in favor of
22
Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (hereinafter "Countrywide Home Loans,
23
Inc.") secured by a Deed of Trust (hereinafter "Deed of Trust") for the
24
finance of the real property located at 2151 Holly Ridge Drive, Hollywood,
25
California 90068. (attached as "Exhibit-1").
26
///
27
///
28
-11-
1 31. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust (hereinafter
2 "ADOT-20101905145"), was recorded in the Los Angeles County
3 Recorder's Office on December 23, 2010 as Instrument No. 20101905145.
4 A certified copy of the ADOT was requested from the Los Angeles County
5 Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-2").
6
7
32. Plaintiffs assert the ADOT-20101905145 is void and not merely voidable
g and that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore
0
~' ~ 9
there is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs'
~~ Declaratory Relief Claims.
~ 10
'~ ~ o
'a o~
11
o Q~
~ U'T 33. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145 purports to have been executed
Vi
~0
~L
12
R ~c
r
C
.
on December 9, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "DEC 09
~ =yN 13
2010".
'
a o ~ E 14
~ o,~
.~
~ -~ W IS
_r
as ~T°° 34. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145 states "TOGETHER WITH
~ _~ 16
o ~~ THE NOTE OR NOTES THEREIN DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO,
~ NM ^7
y M 1 /
-- THE MONEY DUE AND TO BECOME DUE THEREON WITH
.~ 18
INTEREST, AND ALL RIGHTS ACCRUED OR TO ACCRUE UNDER
A 19
THE SAID DEED OF TRUST..."
20
21 35. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145 purports to transfer the subject
22 Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on December 9, 2010.
23
25 belief, that prior to December 9, 2010 neither the subject Deed of Trust or
26 the associated Note were ever granted, assigned or transferred to the
27 CWALT 2007-19 Trust.
28 ~ ///
-12-
1 37. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant MERS executed ADOT-20101905145,
2 purporting to transfer the Deed of Trust "DOT and Note from Countrywide
3 Home Loans, Inc. to Defendant BONY as Trustee for 2007-19 Trust as
4 follows:
5 MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS,INC.
6 T.Sevillano, Assistant SecretaYy
7
8 ~ 38. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
E 9 beliefs, aver that the ADOT-20101905145 is prima facie evidence that the
.~8
assignment purports to have been executed by Defendant MERS in
~ ~o~ 10
~~ beneficiary capacity and not as nominee.
~ ~ 11
~ ~m
a~
~ U'T
~0 12
°
o=c
~ ~o 39. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
o y 13
4=N
' beliefs, allege that Courts have repeatedly ruled, regardless of language
o ~ E 14
a~ ~
-~~W 15
.;,~ contained in the Deed of Trust, Defendant MERS is not in fact a beneficiary,
. n
o ~`
_~ 16 but a nominee of the lender-beneficiary, i.e., a limited agent for the purpose
~~
NM
M 17 of administering the Deed of Trust, for example to substitute Trustees.
J p
6 ~ 10
.F
a 40. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
G 19
beliefs, aver that the ADOT-20101905145 is prima facie evidence that the
20
assignment fails to be executed by `Attorney in Fact" and as such it was not
21
executed in the manner required by section 1095 of the California Civil
22
Code and is therefore VOID.
23
24
25
beliefs, aver that Defendant MERS was acting as an agent for Countrywide
26
Home Loans, Inc., not a principal when Defendant MERS executed and
27
recorded the ADOT-20101905145.
28
- 13-
1 42 Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145 is void on its face, as the

2 ADOT-20101905145 was not executed in compliance with California Civil
3 Code §1095.
4
6
beliefs, aver that this is not a valid execution of a document transferring an
7
interest in real property, as it is not in compliance with Civil Code §1095
8
which makes it mandatory that when an interest in real property is being
0
a E 9 transferred by an agent, it must be executed in the name of the principal,
8
@.
.~ E lO then its agent's name, and then appending the words "Attorney In Fact", or
~o
'a o~ the transfer or conveyance is not a valid conveyance, and as such passes
C ~~ 11
O Q~
U T
L
00 12
nothing, and is "Void". The above execution fails to comply with §1095,
R OL
~C
_ ~ 13
and is void on its face.
N
N
' ~ 14
~ ~~
0 ~~
-~ 44. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
as;~~w 15
o~
_~ 16 beliefs, aver that California Civil Code §1095 controls the manner and
0 ~~
~, N ~
y
method which must be followed when executing instruments transferring an
y 17
estate in real property, and requires that the individual or entity who hold or
,
. ~ ~O
A 19
has as a "power-of-attorney" for his principal, must subscribe the name of
20
his principal to the instrument, and then his own name, and then add the
21
words "Attorney in Fact", or no valid conveyance has been made, and the
22
ADOT-20101905145 is void.
23 ///
24 ///
25 ///
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
-14-
1 II 45. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
2 beliefs, aver that for the ADOT-20101905145 to be valid, it would have had
3 to been executed as follows:
4
5 Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
6 By: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.,
7 Its Attorney In Fact
8
0
L
Qw E 9 T.Sevillano Its Attorney In Fact
c~
~.
.C
~ ~ 10 T.Sevillano, Its Attorney In Fact
~o
a0~~ 11
C ~~
0 Qv
46. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145 does not comply with Civil
00 12
0L
R
i ~ C
O Code §1095 and therefore is void and not merely voidable conveying
_ ~ 13
nothing.
' E 14
~~
°~ E
.;,~
~W 15
as _ ~
or 47. Plaintiffs aver, that any language in the ADOT-20101905145 which claimed
o ~ _~ 16
~~
L NM ~7 to assign the note could not do so, as notes do not move through assignments
h M 1 /
in the land records.

.~ 18
A 19
20
beliefs aver, that Defendant MERS is only able to transfer what it actually
21
holds and cannot transfer a negotiable instrument by virtue of a transfer of
22
real property.
23
25 belief, allege that Defendant MERS has no authority to transfer the interest
26 in Plaintiffs' Note and as the ADOT-20101905145 is a document that
27 purports to assign Plaintiffs' Note and that is a factual impossibility as a
28
- 15-
1 matter of law and therefore is void and not merely voidable conveying
2 nothing.
3
5 b) SECURITIZATION
7
50. Securitization is a financing method whereby loans are made by loan
8
originators, and the notes evidencing the debt are sold to a series of parties,
0
a E 9 the last of which is generally a Securitization Trust. The Trust pays for the
~8
.
.~ E 10 notes with the proceeds of bonds or bond like instruments issued by the
~o
a0 ~~ Trust. The notes themselves are typically owned by the Trust, for the benefit
~ ~ 11
0 a -~
U ~~
w
o~ 12
of investors, who are sometimes called Certificateholders. The Investors are
0L
~cN
CC
_ ~ 13
entitled to payment from the proceeds of the note repayments. Since the
'E 14
bonds are secured by the proceeds of the notes, the bonds are known as
°~ E
"mortgage backed" securities.
~~w 15
;
—~
o ~`
=o
a ~~ 16
0
.
~ NM
y
~7
51. The CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2007-19, Mortgage Pass-Through
y v 1 /
►
~ J
~ 18 Certificates, Series 2007-19 (hereinafter "CWALT 2007-19") is a New York
.~
A 19
Trust formed to act as a Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit, or
20
"REMIC". In order for a Mortgage Backed Securities Trust ("MBS") to
21
qualify for the federal tax REMIC status, one of the many very specific rules
22
that must be followed is that trust assets must be "Bankruptcy Remote".
23
Issuers of the REMIC Trusts have signed themselves up under oath with the
24
SEC and the IRS as mortgage pass-through assets, qualifying as REMICs
25
rather than an ordinary Real Estate Investment Trust ("REIT"). As long as
26
the MBS is a qualified REMIC, no income tax will be charged to the MBS.
27
REMICS were newly invented in 1987 as a tax minimizing measure by
28
Investment Banks. When filing as a REMIC, MBS's are forbidden from
- 16-
1 engaging in any prohibited action that would jeopardize the REMIC tax
2 status as the penalty would result in a one hundred percent(100%) taxation
3 by the IRS.
4 ~ 52 Most importantly, an assignment of the "Note" to the "Trust" after the
closing date is a "Prohibited Transaction" which jeopardizes the favorable
tax status accorded a "REMIC". This transaction would be in contradiction
to the TRUST Laws" and is therefore "VOID".
g
0
~' ~ 9
53. Taxation on contributions after startup are governed by 26 U.S.C. §§
E 10
860G(d)(1) which states: "Except as provided in paragraph (2), if any
~R ap O
a ~~
m 11
amount is contributed to a REMIC after the startup day, there is hereby
o av
~ U'T
~0 12
imposed a tax for the taxable year ofthe REMIC in which the contribution is
Vj ~L
~ ~C
~ ~ 13 received equal to 100 percent of the amount of such contribution."
a =~
' ~ 14
a o•@
~ ~~ 54. Taxation on "Prohibited Transactions" are governed by 26 U.S.C. §§
.°~ -~~W 15
as T~ °°
860F(a)(1) which states: "There is hereby imposed for each taxable year of a
~ _~ 16
~~
~ N~ REMIC a tax equal to 100 percent of the net income derived from prohibited
y N
M 17
transactions."
.~ 18
A 19
55. Pursuant to the IRC, REMICs are treated as pass-through vehicles for tax
20
purposes and enjoy tax-free exemptions and bankruptcy remote protection.
21
Generally, non-compliance with REMIC requirements subjects a REMIC to
22
loss of its tax-free status and bankruptcy-remote privileges. The Prospectus,
23
together with applicable New York Trust Law, forbid and void any action
24
which might jeopardize the tax status of any REMIC and/or impose any tax
25
upon the Trust for prohibited contributions oftransactions.
26
27
28
- 17-
1 56. A copy of the Prospectus for the CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2007-
2 19, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-19 (hereinafter
3 "CWALT 2007-19") was filed under oath with the SEC and is available
4 online at:
5 http://www.sec.Gov/Archives/edgar/data/1269518/00013 6231007001229/c7
6 0725e424b5.htm
7
8 ~ 57 Plaintiffs' initial investigation has confirmed that the Defendants were

0
L
a E 9 involved in an attempt to securitize the mortgage. These parties likely
~8
.
C
~R
~ 10 intended to assign and transfer the mortgage into the CWALT 2007-19
Op O
~a`
rn ~ TrL1St.
a ~ 11
O Q -o
U'~
00 12
~L
C~
►
~ ~ CO 58. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
_ ~ 13
'E 14 belief, allege that the void assignment and the attempted transfer to
~
°~ E
~w 15 securitize the mortgage failed to comply with statutory law, the Prospectus
T~
_ ~
Or
= O
a ~~ 16 for the CWALT 2007-19 Trust, or applicable state and federal law.
0
m
L NM
y M 17
►~ 59. Plaintiffs further allege the mortgage was not properly securitized and that
.~ 18
19
their Note and Deed were never assigned and transferred to the CWALT
20
2007-19 Trust. Accordingly, Defendants have no right or beneficial interest
21
in the collateral and have improperly and fraudulently utilized the
22
foreclosure statutes against Plaintiffs and as such created an unfair business
23
advantage over Plaintiffs.
24
60. Typically, the owners of the mortgage backed securities are investors in
25
large investment pools comprised of pension funds, insurance companies
26
and sovereign wealth funds.
27
28
-18-
1 61. The mortgage payments for the Plaintiffs' Loan are not collected by the loan
2 owners themselves. Rather, the tasks of payment processing, escrow
3 maintenance, loss mitigation and instituting and managing foreclosure are
4 collectively known as "servicing".
5
6
62. When the servicers collect loan payments from the borrowers, the servicers
7
transfer those payments to the Trustee of the Trust ("Trustee"), which then
8
distributes the payments to the Trust's beneficiaries, i.e., the Investors.
0L
~r ~ (~ Therefore, each Trust is primarily administered by two entities: the Trustee,
W .~
.~ E lO who is the "face" of each Trust with the Investors, and the Servicer
~o
'a 0
~~ 11 (sometimes called a master Servicer), who is the "face" of each Trust with
C ~~
O Qv
U'T
00 12
the borrowers. Because a Trustee holds the Trust corpus for the
R
y
o=
~c
►~ beneficiaries, a servicer will act in the name of the Trustee when taking
0 13
=N
~~ ..
'
N ~
~ 14
action against borrowers, which includes the servicers in the name of a
~ ~~
~E
-~ Trustee bringing foreclosure actions against a borrower who is allegedly
~~W 15
;
.n
o~
_~
16
delinquent on their loan payments.
0 ~~
h
i
. NM
y M 17
63. Plaintiffs allege that their Deed of Trust was not assigned, transferred, or
.~ 18
._ granted to the CWALT 2007-19 Trust as required by the Prospectus,
19
statutory law, or applicable state and federal law, including but limited to the
20
SEC and IRC. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such
21
information and beliefs aver, that Defendants' failure to adhere to all statutes
22
and relevant laws pertaining to the pooling and servicing of those loans
23
securitized into the CWALT 2007-19 Trust is a matter of public policy and
24
common law.
25
26
27
28
-19-
1 64. Plaintiffs allege that their Deed of Trust was not properly assigned to the
2 CWALT 2007-19 Trust, as set forth in the Prospectus as well as statutes and
3 relevant laws.
4
5
65. In further violation of the Prospectus, Defendants failed to deposit specific
6
documents with the Custodian of Records to complete the assignment and
7
transfer of Plaintiffs' Note and Deed to the CWALT 2007-19 Trust.
8
L
a E 9
66. Under New York Trust Law, an asset does not become trust property until
the asset is delivered to the Trustee. ("It has long been the law in New York
.~ ~ 10
~o
'a 0
~~ that to subject an asset to the terms of a trust that has an independent
~ ~ 11
0 a~
U'T Trustee..., a grantor must have the intent to make a present gift to the trust
00 12
Ot
~, and must make sufficient delivery of the assets of the trust to the Trustee.")
~, 13
Warren's Heaton on Surrogate's Court Practice 13 App. 4-46 (Linda B.
' ~ 14
~ ~~
'° E
-~
Hirschson et al. eds., 7th ed. 2006). Moreover, NY Estates, Powers and
~~W
;
- ~
15
on
_~ 16 Trusts Law § 7-2.4 states: "If the trust is expressed in the instrument creating
c
0 ~~
NM ^7 the estate of the Trustee, every sale, conveyance or other act of the Trustee
y ~ rj 1 /
in contravention of the trust, except as authorized by this article and by any

.~ 18
other provision of law is void."(Emphasis added)
A 19
20
67. On information and belief Plaintiffs allege that Defendants failed to follow
21
the required securitization process set forth in 26 U.S.C. §§ 860 - 860G.
22
Plaintiffs further allege that the failure to follow the specific transfer and
23
assignment requirements of the Prospectus are fatal to Defendant BONY's
24
claim to own the Note. Plaintiffs further allege that under applicable New
25
York Trust Law, this defect may not now be remedied and may never be
26
remedied in the future.
27
28
-20-
1 ii • The issue of defective assignments in the securitization process has been the
2 focus of state and federal court case decisions, Attorneys General
3 investigations, and Congressional reports. On each level, state and federal
4 entities have concluded that a failure in the securitization process results in a
5 break in the chain of title and the inability of the Securitized Trust to enforce
6 the Note and Deed of Trust.
7
0
8 I'• Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
a, E 9 beliefs, aver that a "Prospectus" is among the many documents recorded
~8
.
.C
~ ~ 10 with the Securities Exchange Commission (hereinafter "SEC") in
Op O
O
~ ~ 11 conjunction with the registration and formation of securitized trusts offer to
0 a~
U'T
t`~'.
00 12
~L
the public. Plaintiffs aver that a Prospectus is not a contract for which they
R ~C
_ ~ 13 are not a party but a formal legal document, which is required by and filed
'E 14 with the Securities and Exchange Commission, that provides details about
~ ~~
~W 15 the investment offering for sale to the public that contains details on the
T~
OO
= n
a ~~ 16 investments' objectives, strategies, risks, performance, distribution policy,

0
y
L N~
17 tax considerations, fees and expenses, and management.
J p
~ 10
.~
A 19 70 Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
20 beliefs, aver that the following facts pertaining to REMIC Trusts are Public
21 Policy and governed by 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G and that the following
22 should be judicially noticed:
23
24 a) The "Closing Date" of the Trust is the "Startup Date" for the REMIC
status of the Trust as defined by 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G.
25
26
b)That 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G requires the asset to be purchased by
27 the Trust within the 3-month period beginning on the startup date of
28 the Trust.
-21-
2 c) That the 3-month period beginning on the startup date of the Trust
ended on or about September 30, 2007 pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§
3
860A-860G.
4
5
d) That 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G requires an asset that is to be
6 purchased by a REMIC Trust to be "Bankruptcy Remote" via two
7 "True Sale" transactions in between the loan originator and the Trust.
g e) That 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G requires an asset that is to be
0 purchased by a REMIC Trust must be a "Qualified Loan".
a ~ 9
w ~~
'~
~ ~ oE lO
~ That 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G requires an asset that is to be
'a ~L
~ ~~ 11
~ UT
purchased by a REMIC Trust must not be a "Defective Obligation".
+~+ ~ o 12,
y 0=
~ ~,O
a z° 13 g) That 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G requires an asset that is to be

purchased by a REMIC Trust must be a "True Sale".
.
~~ ..~ 14
'
p o ~m
~ ~E
•~
° .~w 15
T~
h) That 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G requires an asset that is to be
~ _~ 16
o ~~ purchased by a REMIC Trust must have aValue-To-Loan ratio of
~ NM
v 17
80% or higher.
J p
~ W
~ 10
.~
A 19 71. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
20 beliefs aver, that aforementioned information (items a-h) pertaining to
21 REMIC Trusts, are referenced in the Prospectus, and are Public Policy and
22 governed by 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G, and as such require no standing
23 requirements for Plaintiffs to assert the violations of Public Policy and 26
24 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G of the ADOT identified as instrument number
25 20101905145.
26
27 I~If►a Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
~:3 beliefs, aver that the Prospectus for the CWALT 2007-19 Trust was filed
- 22-
1 with the SEC as Form 424B5. Contained within this Prospectus and its
2 related documents the following information was declared about the
3 investment offering for sale to the public:

4
5 a) That the Issuer was Alternative Loan Trust 2007-19.
6
b)That the Depositor was CWALT,Inc.
7
8
c) That the Seller was Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
L
a ~ 9
8 d)That the Master Servicer was Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP.
.~
c E 10
~R Op O
f0a\
o~
~ ~ 11 e) That the Trustee was The Bank of New York.
0 Q -o
0 UT
o~
~L
12
R
~.0 ~ That the anticipated material federal income tax consequences were
13
N
N based on REMIC Regulations.
~~ ..
' E 14
~ ~~
°~ E
~~w 15
; g)That the Cut-off Date was June 1, 2007.
or
_~
0 ~~ 16
L NM ~7
rte
+
M ~/ h)That the Closing Date was on or about June 29, 2007.
.~ 18
A 19 73. Plaintiffs aver that the aforementioned information pertaining to the
20 CWALT 2007-19 formation; management; and tax considerations pursuant
21 to the Prospectus was declared about the investment offering for sale to the
22 public, Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information
23 and beliefs, aver that this information was proclaimed to the world via the
24 Prospectus for the CWALT 2007-19.
25
27 beliefs, aver that the CWALT 2007-19 Trust Prospectus is disclosure
28 document and that although it is not a contract, barring amendment or
- 23 -
1 alteration, strict compliance the CWALT 2007-19 Trust Prospectus is

2 required by the SEC.
3
4
75. Plaintiffs aver that the CWALT 2007-19 Trust Prospectus and its related
5
documents states that all loans will be transferred into the trust no later than
6
June 29, 2007.
7
g 76. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145 is prima facie evidence that on
0
~' ~ 9
December 9, 2010 Plaintiffs' Note was attempted to be transferred to the
:- ~ trust nearly three and one half(31/2)years after June 29, 2007 as stated in the
'~ ~ oE 10
a ~~ Prospectus, and required its related documents.
11
o av
~ U'T
~+ ~ O
+ 12
Vi ~ L
C
~ ~0 77. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145 is prima facie evidence that the
a =N
'
~ 13
assignment attempted to transfer the beneficial interest of Plaintiffs' DOT to
a'
, o ~~ 14
~ a,E The Bank of New York Mellon FKA The Bank of New York, as Trustee for
.°
~ W 15
f~ Tn
~ _~ 16 CWALT 2007-19 Trust nearly three and one half (3'/2) years after June 29,
y ~~
~ N~
y ~ 17
2007 as stated in the Prospectus, and required its related documents.
J
;
.~, ~ 18
78. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145 purportedly transferring
A 19
Plaintiffs' Note and DOT after June 29, 2007 to The Bank of New York
20
Mellon FKA The Bank of New York, as Trustee for CWALT 2007-19 Trust
21
is in direct conflict with the Prospectus and its related documents filed with
22
the SEC and is therefore a securities violation.
23
24
79. Plaintiffs aver that the Prospectus requires loans to first be transferred to a
25
designated "Depositor" as part of making the trust "Bankruptcy Remote", a
26
requirement of 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G that requires an asset that is to be
27
28
- 24-
1 purchased by a REMIC Trust to be "Bankruptcy Remote" via two "True
2 Sale" transactions in between the loan originator and the Trust.
3
4 80. Plaintiffs aver that the failure to transfer the loans to the designated
5 "Depositor" prior the transfer to the Trustee was in direct conflict with the
6 Prospectus and is therefore a securities violation and also violation of the
7 requirement of 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G that an asset that is to be purchased
8 by a REMIC Trust to be "Bankruptcy Remote" and was therefore not only a

0
L
a E 9 securities violation but also exposed the investors to massive tax liabilities.
@.
a ~ 10
~R 0p O
<O a`
a oG
~ ~ 11 81. Plaintiffs aver that CWALT, Inc. is the "Depositor" of record for the
0 a
UT
-~
o~ 12 CWALT 2007-19 Trust as evidenced by declarations made by the
~L
R c
,
► ~0 Prospectus and recorded for public record with the Securities Exchange
13
N
f0
~~ ..
' ~ 14 Commission.
o -~
a~ ~
-~~W
; ~ 15
- ~
or
_~ 16 82. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145 is prima facie evidence that the
0 ~~
NM
assignment attempted to transfer the beneficial interest of Plaintiffs' DOT to
h M ~~
►
' J
~ 18 directly to Defendant BONY as Trustee for C WALT 2007-19 Trust
2
_~ 19 circumventing Defendant CWALT as the "Depositor" of the CWALT 2007-
20 19 Trust.
21
22
beliefs aver, that CWALT, Inc. never was transferred the Plaintiffs' Note nor
23
assigned the Plaintiffs'- Deed of Trust, and as such CWALT, Inc.'s ability to
24
have deposited Plaintiffs' Loan (Note and Deed of Trust) into the CWALT
25
2007-19 Trust is a factual impossibility.
26
27
28
- 25-
1 84. Plaintiffs aver that the transfer the beneficial interest of Plaintiffs' Loan to
2 directly to Defendant BONY as Trustee for CWALT 2007-19 Trust
3 circumventing Defendant CWALT as the "Depositor" is a violation of the

4 requirement of 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G that an asset that is to be purchased
5 by a REMIC Trust to be "Bankruptcy Remote" and was therefore not only a
6 securities violation but also exposed the investors to massive tax liabilities.
7
8 Plaintiffs aver that the Deed of Trust that Plaintiffs signed as a security
0
L
a ~ 9 instrument of Plaintiffs' Note states that "Borrower warrants and will defend
wC .~
~R
E lO
Op O
generally the title to the Property against all claims and demands, subject to
a O
C ~
rn ~ 11 any encumbrances of record." and as such Plaintiffs assert that they are
0 Qv
U'T
H
00 12 contractually required to defend the title to the Property from the Defendants
CC Or
~c
►~
~, 13 as Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
'~ 14 beliefs aver, that the Defendants' alleged violations of the aforementioned
~ ~~
°~ E
~_~W IS public policies and recordation of false documents attempt to erroneously
Tn
o~
~? =o
encumber title to Plaintiffs' Property that they are contractually required to
0
H
~~ 16
L N~
17 defend.
►_
.~ 18
~_ 19 86 Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
20 beliefs, aver that actions, described above, are in direct conflict with the
21 Prospectus or Amended Prospectus are securities violations and that actions
22 that intentionally circumvented policies and procedures, stated in the
23 Prospectus, that expose the investor to loses and/or tax liabilities that he/she
24 would not be subject to had the policies and procedures, quantified in the
25 Prospectus, been followed and constitute securities fraud.
26
27 Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
28 beliefs aver, that the alleged deceptive, fraudulent, and possibly felonious
- 26-
1 acts, described above, and set forth herein were performed by the
2 Defendants to circumvent California Revised Statutes and create an unfair
3 business advantage over the Plaintiffs.
4
5
6
beliefs aver, that genuine controversies exist as to whether or not that the
7
purported transfer of Plaintiffs' Promissory Note and/or the assignment of
8
the corresponding Deed of Trust were in direct conflict with Prospectus and
0
a ~ 9
Public Policy and as such created multiple taxable events that Plaintiffs
8
.~
.C
~ E lO assert have never be paid.
~o
a o~
C ~~
rn ~ 11
O Qv
UT
to.m'
go 12
R Ot
~C
=Y 13
beliefs aver, that genuine controversies also exist as to whether or not that
' E 14 the purported transfer of Plaintiffs' Promissory Note and/or the assignment
~~
°~ E
of the corresponding Deed of Trust were in direct conflict with the Prospect
~~w 15
as ;
on
_ ~ 16 as a matter of law and as such clouded the title to Plaintiffs' property and
0 ~~
.
~ N~ impaired their ability to identify and negotiate with the true and correct
17
beneficiary oftheir loan.
. ~ 18
,
A 19
20
90. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145 are violations of Public Policy
21
and 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G for the following reasons:
22
a) Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145 is in direct violation of the
23
REMIC requirements, as required by the IRC 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G,
24
as the loan must have been transferred to CWALT 2007-19 Trust by
25 September 30, 2007.
26
27 b)Plaintiffs aver, that the ADOT-20101905145 is in direct violation of 26

U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G's requirement that the asset to be purchased by the
28 I
- 27-
1 CWALT 2007-19 Trust within the 3-month period beginning on the

startup date of the Trust.
2
3
c)Plaintiffs aver, that the ADOT-20101905145 is in direct violation of 26
4 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G's timing requirement that ended on or about
5 September 30, 2007.
6
d)Plaintiffs aver, that the ADOT-20101905145 purports to assign
7
Plaintiffs' loan directly from Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. to The Bank
8
of New York Mellon FKA The Bank of New York as Trustee for the
a ~ 9 CWALT 2007-19 Trust in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G's
y
.~
C
E lO
~R Op O
requirement that an asset that is to be purchased by a REMIC Trust to be
a O
`Bankruptcy Remote" via two "True Sale" transactions in between the
C ~ ~
rn ~ 11
0 a~
6~
UT loan originator and the Trust.
p~ 12
R OL
~C
i
_ ~N 13
N
N
e)Plaintiffs aver, that the ADOT-20101905145 violates 26 U.S.C. §§
'~ 14 860A-860G requirement that an asset that is to be purchased by a REMIC
7 °~ E
~~
-;~
~~w 15 Trust must be a "Qualified Loan" as Plaintiffs aver that the loan was in
as -~
on
_~ default at the time of the ADOT-20101905145 and as such could not
0 ~~ 16
N~ ~7 have been a "Qualified Loan".
y ~ 1/
~ ~O
.~ ~ Plaintiffs aver, that the ADOT-20101905145 violates 26 U.S.C. §§
A 19 860A-860G requirement that an asset that is to be purchased by a REMIC
20 Trust must not be a "Defective Obligation" as Plaintiffs aver that the loan
21
was in default at the time ofthe ADOT-20101905145.
22
g)Plaintiffs aver, that the ADOT-20101905145 violates 26 U.S.C. §§
23 860A-860G requirement that an asset that is to be purchased by a REMIC
24 Trust must be a "True Sale" as Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and
25 based on such information and belief, that a True Sale never took place.
26
28 beliefs aver, that lacking an "Opinion Letter of Counsel" stating that the
- 28-
1 CWALT 2007-19 Trust's acceptance of Plaintiffs' loan via the ADOT-

2 20101905145 is not a violation of any SEC, IRC, or NY EPTL and the
3 ADOT-20101905145 voidable, the ADOT recorded in the Los Angeles
4 County Recorder's Office Instrument No. 20101905145 is in fact VOID.
5
6
7
beliefs aver, that Defendant BONY, as Trustee for the CWALT 2007-19
8
Trust, is the sole gatekeeper for the protection of the Trusts and their
0
a ~ 9
beneficial Certificateholders and must at all times, in addition to acting in
~3
.
.~ E lO the best interests of the Trusts, adhere to all statutes and relevant laws
~o
a o~ pertaining to the pooling and servicing of those loans securitized into the
~ ~ 11
0 a -~
U'T
+~i 00 12
Trusts for which they are Trustee.
y OL
CQ C
►
'
o ~,N 13
_~
93. As alleged herein, Plaintiffs aver that Defendant BONY wholly failed to
' E 14
~
~ ~~~ discharge its duties and obligations to protect the Trusts and comply with
~W
~,r 15
_~
~: o~
_~ 16 public policy and statutory law. Instead, to protect its own business interests,
a
0 ~~
NM BONY ignored pervasive and systemic deficiencies in the underlying loan
y
y M 17
pools and the servicing of those loans and unreasonably refused to take any
18
~C action. In addition to causing billions of dollars in damages to the Trusts for
-, 19
which Defendant BONY is the Trustee for the CWALT 2007-19 Trust,
20
collateral damage and prejudice to borrowers have occurred as a result of
21
Defendant BONY's abdication of responsibility.
22
23
94. Subsequently, Defendants attempted but failed to assign or transfer
24
Plaintiffs' Note to the CWALT 2007-19 Trust. As such, Defendants have no
25
authority to collect on the Note and enforce the Deed of Trust. Despite
26
Defendants' failure to perfect a security interest, Defendants and their agents
27
have collected and attempted to collect on this Note and enforce the Deed of
28
- 29-
1 Trust with the knowledge that they have no legal right to do so. In addition
2 to violating the Fair Debt collection Practices Act (hereinafter "FDCPA"),
3 the Truth in Lending Act (hereinafter "TILA") and the Consent Judgment
4 commonly known as the "National Mortgage Settlement", Defendants
5 knowingly concealed their lack of an enforceable security interest by
6 fabricating and recording false documents in the Los Angeles County
7 Recorder's Office. Defendants' conduct is not only unfair and fraudulent,
g but also constitutes a violation of New York Penal Code § 187 et seq.
0
~' ~ 9 Through this action, Plaintiffs seek damages resulting from Defendants'
~~
'~ ~0 10 unlawful conduct and a declaratory judgment establishing that Defendants
a of
m om 11 have failed to substantiate a perfected security interest in the Note and Deed
~ U'_
~0
of 12 of Trust (collectively hereinafter "Loan"). Simply put, Defendants have no
~+ ~
a =N 13 real, equitable, or pecuniary interest in the Note and Deed of Trust.
'
w o~ 14
~ °~ E
.°~ -~~W 15 95. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
as T~ ~°
~ _~ 16 beliefs, allege Defendants directly or indirectly through agents authorized or
o ~~
d
y
NM
M 17
unauthorized are prejudicing Plaintiffs in the following areas but not limited
18
to:
,
.
A 19
a)Impairing Plaintiffs' ability to negotiate a loan modification with the true
20
and correct beneficiary of Plaintiffs' loan.
21
22 b)Impairing Plaintiffs' ability to negotiate a short sale with the true and
23 correct beneficiary of Plaintiffs' loan.
24
25 c)Impairing Plaintiffs' ability to obtain new financing.
26
d)Impairing Plaintiffs' ability to provide a clear and correct title to a
27
potential buyer of Plaintiffs' home.
28
- 30-
1 e) Most importantly, Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145, as the

C WALT 2007-19 Trust is not the true and correct beneficiary of
2
Plaintiffs' loan, and exposes them to multiple judgments and/or demands
3
for payment on Plaintiffs' loan.
4
5
6 beliefs aver, that Defendant BONY, is a Trustee for over one thousand
7 residential mortgage-backed securities (hereinafter "RMBS") trusts
8 originally securitized by more than $1 trillion dollars of residential mortgage
a ~ 9 loans, including the CWALT 2007-19 Trust.
~, @.
.~ ~oE 10
a0 ~~
~ ~ 11
0 a -~
U'~
97. Plaintiffs' initial investigation into documents filed in the Los Angeles
rte
+ p~ 12
Or
~C
County Recorder's Office in connection with Plaintiffs' home, the real
`
~
~, 13 property, commonly known as 2151 Hollyridge Drive, Hollywood,
~~
' ~ 14
~~ California 90068. While reviewing the aforementioned documents, Plaintiffs
°~ E
~_~W
~ .~ 15 were appalled to see that several documents contained information that was
o~
_~
c ~~ 16 known to be false or should have be known to be false by the Defendants.
0
Fw NM
rte
H
+ M 17
~
~
.~:
, 18 98. Plaintiffs became aware that Attorney General of Nevada, Catherine Cortez
A 19
.~
Masto, and Attorney General of California, Kamala Harris, launched a joint
20 investigation of residential mortgage foreclosure practices, including failed
21 securitizations. Attorney General Masto filed a complaint against Bank of
22 America in United States District Court in Reno, in which her office alleged:
23
24 "Bank of America misrepresented both in communications with Nevada

25 consumers and in documents they recorded andfiled, that they had authority
26 toforeclose upon consumers' homes as servicerfor the trusts that held these
27 mortgages. Defendants knew (and were on notice) that they had never
28
- 31-
1 properly transferred [text redacted) these mortgages to those trusts, failing
2 to deliver properly endorsed oY assigned mortgage notes as required by the
3 relevant legal contracts and state law. Because the trusts never became
4 holders of these mortgages, Defendants lacked authority to collect or
5 foreclose on her behalf and never should have represented they could. "
6
7 99. Plaintiffs additionally became aware Congress had recognized the
8 importance of the Securitized Trusts' strict compliance with the

~ 9 PROSPECTUS and New York Trust Law. Specifically, the congressional
~.
Oversight Panel, in its November 16, 2010 Oversight Report Examining the
~o~ 10
o~
~ ~,
~ 11 Consequences of Mortgage Irregularities for Financial Stability and
a~
U'T
00 12 Foreclosure Mitigation determined "[I]f the transfer for the notes and
oL
~. mortgages did not comply with the PROSPECTUS, the transfer would be
_~ 13
N
(6
' E 14 void, and the assets would not have been transferred to the trust."
~~ ~~
-;~~W
,~ 15
-n
o~
_~ 16 100. As Plaintiffs are stockholders in both the Defendant the BONY and the
a ~~
0
H
.
~ NM Intercontinental Exchange, Inc., and as Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. is the
v 17
►
~ J
~ 18 majority stockholder of MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. and as Defendant
2
A 19 MERS is a wholly owned subsidiary of MERSCORP Holdings, Inc.,
20 Plaintiffs' investments are in jeopardy as a direct result of Negligent
21 Misrepresentations and ultra wires acts involving, inter alia, blatant
22 violations of Internal Revenue Code and Securities Laws committed by
23 Defendants BONY, CWALT and MERS.
24
101. Accordingly, Plaintiffs became extremely concerned with Defendant BONY
25
accepting the transfer and assignment of non-qualified investments (i.e.,
26
loans in default, non-performing loans and loans with below 80% Value-To-
27
Loan ratios, loans assigned to the Trust after the Trust's closing date),
28
- 32-
1 violating the tax status of the REMIC and have now subjected the entire
2 Trust, valued at $1,166,488,020 to tax liabilities which, on information and
3 belief, has not been paid.
4
5
102. In addition to their own loan Plaintiffs have discovered and identified more
6
than one hundred (100) other loans, purportedly transferred into Securitized
7
Trusts that Defendant BONY in the Trustee, all containing similar defects.
8
a E 9
103. Plaintiffs aver that in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office alone
8
Plaintiffs are aware of at least 32 loans, in at least three different county
R ~o~ 10
a0~~ 11 recorder's offices, purporting to transferal beneficial interest of loans into
G ~~
0 Qv
i UT the CWALT 2007-19 Trust in direct violation of SEC Law, IRC, and NY
00 12
QL
C0 g c
►
~ 5.y ~~~~
oy 13
=N
f0
' E 14
~~ ~~ 104. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust, was
.~, .-~
;,~
~W 15
o ~`
=o
recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on March 18, 2008 as
0C ~~ 16 Instrument No. 20080460795 (hereinafter "ADOT-20080460795")
N ~.j
+d
y
+ 17
purporting to transferal beneficial interest of the loan referenced within the
.~ 18
document into the CWALT 2007-19 Trust. A certified copy of the ADOT-
~_ 19
20080460795 was requested from the Los Angeles County Recorder's
20
Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-3").
21
22 105. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-20080460795 is void and not merely voidable and
23
that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
24 is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
25 Relief Claims.
26
///
27
///
2s
- 33 -
1 106. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20080460795 purports to have been executed
2 on March 18, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "MAR 13
3 2008".
4
5
107. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20080460795 states "TOGETHER WITH
6
THE NOTE OR NOTES THEREIN DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO,
7
THE MONEY DUE AND TO BECOME DUE THEREON WITH
8
0
~.
.
a ~ 9
8
.@
w
.~ E lO
~o
'a o~ 108. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20080460795 purports to transfer the subject
C ~~ 11
O)~
O QV
UT
~ ' p~
Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on March 18, 2008 in direct violation of
12
y OL
,
► C
N
Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2007-19 Trust.
o ~, 13
=y
f0
' E 14
~_~W 15
Tn
or recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on July 16, 2008 as
~1 =o
0a ~~ 16 Instrument No. 20081261632 (hereinafter "ADOT-20081261632")
NM ~7
y M 1/
h
►
~ J
.~ ~ 18
_~ 19
20
Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-4").
21
23 that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
25 Relief Claims.
26
///
27
///
28
-34-
2 on June 23, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "JLJN 23
3 [►~III~:~
5
6
7
8
0
L
a
~o 9
U
W .~
~+
C
E 10
~R Op O
a0
~~ 113. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20081261632 purports to transfer the subject
C ~ ~ 11
O Q'o
v U'~ Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on June 23, 2008 in direct violation of
00 12
OL
R
►j ~,0 Securities law and the IRC governing the C WALT 2007-19 Trust.
_ ~ 13
N
f0
'~~ ..
E 14
-~
~W 15
_~
T~
or recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on August 27, 2008
_~ 16
0a ~~ as Instrument No. 20081546417 (hereinafter "ADOT-20081546417")
L NM
y M ~~
h
►_ purporting to transferal beneficial interest of the loan referenced within the

18
_~ 19
20
21
25 Relief Claims.
26
///
27
///
2s
-35-
2 on August 14, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "AUG 14
3 I
~ 11:
5
1 17. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20081546417 states "TOGETHER WITH
6
7
8
0
L
a
~ 9
.@
.0
~ E 10
~o
a o~ 1 18. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20081546417 purports to transfer the subject
C ~ ~
rn ~ 11
0 Qv
L
U'T Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on August 14, 2008 in direct violation of
00 12
o=
~, Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2007-19 Trust.
~, 13
' ~ 14
~ ~~ 1 19. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust, was
°~ E
-~
;
~~W 15
m recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on September 04,
o~
_~
0 ~~ 16
a
2008 as Instrument No. 200815993465 (hereinafter "ADOT-
L NM
y
y M 17
i J p
200815993465") purporting to transferal beneficial interest of the loan
~ 10
referenced within the document into the CWALT 2007-19 Trust. A certified
A 19
copy of the ADOT-200815993465 was requested from the Los Angeles
20
County Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-6").
21
25 Relief Claims.
26 ///
27
///
28
-36-
1 121. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-200815993465 purports to have been

2 executed on August 21, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on
3 "AUG 21 2008".
4
5
6
7
8
~ 9
8
.~
~oE 10
0
~ ~ 11
a -~
U'T Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on August 14, 2008 in direct violation of
00 12
QL
~C
_ ~ 13
' E 14
~~ 124. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust, was
°~ E
-~
~~W 15
;
~; o~ recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on September 12,
~. =o
a ~~ 16
0
NM
2008 as Instrument No. 20081647198 (hereinafter "ADOT-20081647198")
rte
+ M I7
J
.~ ~ 18 document into the CWALT 2007-19 Trust. A certified copy of the ADOT-
A 19
20
21
25 Relief Claims.
26
///
2~
///
2s
-37-
2 on September 5, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "SEP 23
3 2008".
4
5
6
7
8
0
a E 9 THE SAID DEED OF TRUST..."
8
.~
y
.~
C ~ 10
~o
a0
c ~~ 11
0 av
U'T Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on September 5, 2008 in direct violation
00 12
OL
R ~C
_ y
of Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2007-19 Trust.
=Y 13
' ~ 14
~~ 129. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust, was
~E
~~W 15
;
on recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on January 12, 2009
_~
a ~~ 16
0
N~
as Instrument No. 20090037186 (hereinafter "ADOT-20090037186")
rte
y
+ M I7
►
] J o
.~ ~ ~O
A 19
20
21
25 Relief Claims.
26
28 on January 5, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "1/5/09".
- 38-
3 THE NOTE OR NOTES THEREIN DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO,
4
5
6
7
133. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20090037186 purports to transfer the subject
8
L
C1r
Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on January 5, 2009 in direct violation of
~
8 9
C
~R
E 10
CO O
~~`
a O ff
,
~ ~ 11
0a
UT
-~ 134. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust, was
00 12
pL
CO
~. recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on January 25, 2009
_ ~y 13
N
f0 as Instrument No. 20090095743 (hereinafter "ADOT-20090095743")
'E 14
~~ purporting to transferal beneficial interest of the loan referenced within the
-~~w 15
_~
on
T~
_~ 16
0
0 CO
N~ ~7
h ~ ~ /
;
► J
.~ ~ 18 I
A 19 135. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-20090095743 is void and not merely voidable and
20
21
is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
22
Relief Claims.
23
25 on January 20, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "JAN 20
26 2009".
27 ///
28 ///
-39-

3 THE MONEY DUE AND TO BECOME DUE THEREON WITH
4 INTEREST, AND ALL RIGHTS ACCRUED OR TO ACCRUE UNDER
5 THE SAID DEED OF TRUST..."
6
7
g Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on January 20, 2009 in direct violation
0
'
° $ 9
~
~R aD O
~ 10
'a o~ 139. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust, was
11
U recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on January 29, 2009
°~ ~0 12
gr
R ~ ~y as Instrument No. 20090120493 (hereinafter "ADOT-20090120493")
o ~, 13
a = ~,
'
a o ~ ~ 14
~,~ document into the CWALT 2007-19 Trust. A certified copy of the ADOT-
•~
° .~°T~
W 15
~ _~ 16
o ~~
~ NM Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-10").
v 17
J
.~ W 18
140. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-20090120493 is void and not merely voidable and
A 19
20
21
Relief Claims.
22
24
on January 26, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "JAN 26
25 2009".
26
27 ~ 142. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20090120493 states "TOGETHER WITH
- 40-

4
5
6
Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on January 26, 2009 in direct violation
7
8
a 144. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust, was
~
8 9
c
recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on February 3, 2009
.~ ~ 10
ao0
0. 0
~~ as Instrument No. 20090142943 (hereinafter "ADOT-20090142943")
a ~
rn ~ 11
0 Q -o
U'T purporting to transferal beneficial interest of the loan referenced within the
p0 IZ
H Os
CQ
~~ ~,0 document into the CWALT 2007-19 Trust. A certified copy of the ADOT-
13
N
'~ 14
'
° E
-~~W 15
_~T~
o~
=o
0 ~~ 16 145. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-20090142943 is void and not merely voidable and
NM
h M 17
.~ 18
._ 19
Relief Claims.
20
22 on January 28, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "1/28/09"
23

- 41-
3
Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on January 28, 2009 in direct violation
4
5
149. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust, was
6
recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on June 2, 2009 as
7
Instrument No. 20090816316 (hereinafter "ADOT-20090816316")
8
~' ~ 9
' ~ 10
R ~o
a OL
~ ~ o, 11
UT Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-12").
wrA ~0
~L
12
~'n ~,O
.a = N 13
'
w o~ 14
~ °~ E that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
.°~ -~~"' 15
as ~T°° is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
~ _~ 16
~
y ~~
NM
Relief Claims.
y M 17
~e
.~ 18 151. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20090816316 purports to have been executed
A 19
on May 22, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "MAY 22
20 2009"
21

27 ~ ///
28 ///
-42-
2 Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on May 22, 2009 in direct violation of
3 Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2007-19 Trust.
4
5
recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on June 22, 2009 as
7
g purporting to transferal beneficial interest of the loan referenced within the
0
a $ 9
w ~ 20090934657 was requested from the Los Angeles County Recorder's
~
~R ap O
E lO
CI O~
11 Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-13").
U
~~
gr 12
~~ 155. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-20090934657 is void and not merely voidable and
rii -~
O y 13
~" = i~
'
a o ~•E 14
~ ~~
.~
~ ~W 15
(~ T~
Relief Claims.
a 16
~ _~
y ~~
~ N~
N 17
J
156. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20090934657 purports to have been executed
.~ ~ 18 on June 15, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "JLTN 15
A 19
2009"
20

24
26
///
27
///
28
- 43 -
2 Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on June 15, 2009 in direct violation of
4
5
6
recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on July 22, 2009 as
7
Instrument No. 20091 106490 (hereinafter "ADOT-20091106490")
8 purporting to transferal beneficial interest of the loan referenced within the

0
L
~" ~ 9
~ 20091106490 was requested from the Los Angeles County Recorder's
5 ~o
'~ ~ 10
a o~ Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-14").
11
~0
gr 12
R gc
~
.
n '
5O ~~ 13
a =~,
'
a o E 14
~ ~~ is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
.°~ -~~w 15
as T~ °°
Relief Claims.
~ _~ 16
y ~~
~ N~ ^7
y ~r~j 1 /
-- 161. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20091106490 purports to have been executed
J
.~
~, ~ 18 on July 16, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "JLJL 16
A 19
2~~g".
20

26
///
27
///
28
-44-
2 Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on July 16, 2009 in direct violation of
4
5
6
recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on September 16,
7
8
0
a ~ 9
8
ya .~ 20091395777 was requested from the Los Angeles County Recorder's
.~ E 10
~o
a o~ Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-15").
m ~ 11
~
0 a~
UT
6~
p~ 12
R OL
~C
_ ~ 13
' ~ 14
~ ~~
°~ E is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
.-~
;,~
~"' 1 S
_~
_~ or Relief Claims.
a ~~ 16
0
y
it N~ ~7
y ~.j 1/
J p
/
~
.~
d ~ 10
on September 10, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "SEP 3
A 19
2008".
20

26
28 Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on September 10, 2009 in direct
- 45-
1 violation of Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2007-19
2 Trust.
3
4 169. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust, was
5
recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on September 17,
6

g document into the CWALT 2007-19 Trust. A certified copy of the ADOT-
0
~" ~ 9 20091420462 was requested from the Los Angeles County Recorder's
w -~ Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-16").
5 E 10
•~ (p L
~ O~
11
i Uv
~~
gt 12
R gc
~
v~ 5
'
O"`y
a = ~,
13
'
a o E 14
~ ~~
..~ ~W 15
Relief Claims.
T~ ~
on 0
d =~ 16
~~ 171. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20091420462 purports to have been executed
~ N~ 7
y
y N
v 17
J
on September 3, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "JUN 23
.~ W 18
2008".
AI 19

21
25
27 Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on June 23, 2008 in direct violation of
- 46-
2
3
recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on November 6,
4 2009 as Instrument No. 20091678186 (hereinafter "ADOT-20091678186")
5
6 document into the CWALT 2007-19 Trust. A certified copy of the ADOT-
7 20091678186 was requested from the Los Angeles County Recorder's

0
L
E 9
8
y 175. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-20091678186 is void and not merely voidable and
.~
~oE 10
a0
~~ that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
~ ~ 11
0 a -~
i UT is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
00 12
OL
~.0 Relief Claims.
13
'~ 14
~~ 176. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20091678186 purports to have been
.-~
;,~
~w 15
_~ executed on October, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on
~;. on
~ _~
a ~~ 16
0
L NM
~~ "10/29/09".
rte
y
+ M 17
'
~ J
.~ ~ 18 177. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20091678186 states "TOGETHER WITH

A 19 THE NOTE OR NOTES THEREIN DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO,
23
25 Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on October, 2009 in direct violation of
26 Securities law and the IRC governing the C WALT 2007-19 Trust.
27 ///
2s
-47-
2 recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on November 9,
7 Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-18").
8
0
a ~ 9 180. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-20091684601 is void and not merely voidable and
@.
~ 10
~R Op O
O
e ~ ~ 11
0 a -~
U'T
L
00 12
Relief Claims.
oL
~.
~, 13
' ~ 14
~~ ~~~
-~
on November 3, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on
;~W 15
-_~
o~
_~ 16 "11/3/09"
a
0 ~~
iw NM ^7
y M 1/
J
.~ ~ 18 THE NOTE OR NOTES THEREIN DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO,
A 19
20
21
22
23
24
Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on November 3, 2009 in direct violation
25
26
28 recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on November 23,
- 48-

~f
7
~, g that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
0
~' ~ 9
~ Relief Claims.
'~ ~ o~ 10
'a o~
m 11
o a -o
`~ V >. 186. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20091767531 purports to have been executed
r/~
~0
~L
12
~ ~C
on October 19, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "OCT 19
a ~@ 13
2009".
~ ~ 14
a o ~~
o mE
•~ ~ W 15
m T~ ~° 187. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20091767531 states "TOGETHER WITH
~ _~ 16
o ~~ THE NOTE OR NOTES THEREIN DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO,
~ NM
y M 17
J
;
.~, ~ 18 INTEREST, AND ALL RIGHTS ACCRUED OR TO ACCRUE UNDER
A 19
20
22
Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on October 19, 2009 in direct violation
23
24
26 recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on December 2, 2009
- 49-
2 2009182000 was requested from the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office
3 and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-20").
4
5
7
g Relief Claims.
0
L
~" ~ 9
: ~
: 191. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2009182000 purports to have been executed
5 E 10
•
~ (p L
a ~~ on Oct 15, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "OCT 15,
11
i Uv
2009"
h ~~
g~ 12
~~
~ °
,o. z N
13
192. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2009182000 states "TOGETHER WITH THE
' ~~ ..
a o•~
~ 14
~ ~E NOTE OR NOTES THEREIN DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO, THE
~W
T~
15
MONEY DUE AND TO BECOME DUE THEREON WITH INTEREST,
~ _~ 16
o ~~ AND ALL RIGHTS ACCRUED OR TO ACCRUE UNDER THE SAID
N~
M 17
-- DEED OF TRUST..."
J
.~ W 18
A 19 193. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2009182000 purports to transfer the subject
20
Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on Oct 15, 2009 in direct violation of
21
22
24 recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on December 14,
27 document into the C WALT 2007-19 Trust. A certified copy of the ADOT-
28
-50-

3
4
5
6
7
Relief Claims.
8
L 196. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20091892493 purports to have been executed
~
8 9
on December 3, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on
.~ ~oE lO
a0
~~ "12/13/09".
~ ~ 11
0 a -~
L
U'T
00 12
R o~ 197. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20091892493 states "TOGETHER WITH
,
► ~.0
13
N
f0 THE NOTE OR NOTES THEREIN DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO,
' ~~ ..
E 14
~ ~ ~~~ THE MONEY DUE AND TO BECOME DUE THEREON WITH
.;,~
~w 15
as INTEREST, AND ALL RIGHTS ACCRUED OR TO ACCRUE UNDER
on
_~
0 ~~ 16 THE SAID DEED OF TRUST..."
NM ~7
h M ~ /
~
RI
/
.
.~ ~ 10
~, 19 Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on December 3, 2009 in direct violation
20 of Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2007-19 Trust.
21
23 recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on June 2, 2010 as
24 Instrument No. 20100742671 (hereinafter "ADOT-20100742671")
- 51-
5 Relief Claims.
6
7
on May 27, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "May 27
8
2010".
~ 9
~8
.
~o~ 10
o~ 202. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20100742671 states "TOGETHER WITH
~~
~ 11
a~
UT THE NOTE OR NOTES THEREIN DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO,
00 12
of
~. THE MONEY DUE AND TO BECOME DUE THEREON WITH
_ ~ 13
N
fC INTEREST, AND ALL RIGHTS ACCRUED OR TO ACCRUE UNDER
' E 14
~~ ~~~ THE SAID DEED OF TRUST..."
-~
~~w 15
;
—~
on
_~
a ~~ 16
NM ^7
w ~ rj 1/
Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on May 27, 2010 in direct violation of
.~ 18
A 19
21 recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on May 12, 2011 as
22 Instrument No. 201 10674773 (hereinafter "ADOT-20110674773")
27 ///
28 ///
-52-
4 Relief Claims.
5
6
206. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-201 10674773 purports to have been executed
7 on May 9, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "MAY 09
8 2011".
0
L
~" ~ 9
'
~ ~ o~ 10
~ of
,~ ~~ 11
UT THE MONEY DUE AND TO BECOME DUE THEREON WITH
Vi
~0
QL
12
~N
a= ~, 13
' N
a o @•E 14
~ °~ E
.~ -~
~W 15
~ T~ ~ 208. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20110674773 purports to transfer the subject
~ _~ 16
o ~ fO Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on May 9, 2011 in direct violation of
N~
y N
~ 17
.~ 18
AI 19 209. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust, was
20 recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on September 13,
22
23
24
25
26
- 53-

2 Relief Claims.
3
5
on September 7, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on
6 "September 07, 2010".
8
0
L
a E 9 Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on September 7, 2010 in direct violation
8
.~
__ E lO of Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2007-19 Trust.
~R Op O
~a`
a
Ov
~ ~ 11
0 a~
UT 213. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust, was
0o
0L
IZ
~~ ~C
recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on March 5, 2010 as
_ ~ 13
N
' ~ 14
~~ ~~
~W
T~
15
_~
~;. or
~ _~ document into the CWALT 2007-19 Trust. A certified copy of the ADOT-
a 16
0 ~~
L N~ ^7 20100304229 was requested from the Los Angeles County Recorder's
rte
+ M 1 /
h
R
►~ Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-25").
,
. 18
A 19
20
21
22
Relief Claims.
23
25 on February 1, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "FEB Ol,
26 2010".
27
///
2s
-54-

6
7
g Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on February 1, 2010 in direct violation
0
a ~ 9 of Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2007-19 Trust.
~~
C ~ oE lO
'~
a ~~ 218. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust, was
C rn 11
~ UT recorded in the Los Angeles County Recorder's Office on December 4, 2009
°V~i ~0 12
~L
R ~0 C
as Instrument No. 20091838904 (hereinafter "ADOT-20091838904")
'
~ 13
=y
'
a o E 14
~ ~~
.°
,~ ~W
Qa _ ~ 15
~`~
~ _~ 16
o ~n ~
~ NM Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-26").
M 17
J
;
.~, ~ 18 219. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-20091838904 is void and not merely voidable and
A 19
20
21
Relief Claims.
22
24 on October 6, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "October
25 06, 2009"
26
- 55-

4
5
6
Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on October 6, 2009 in direct violation of
7
8
a 223. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
~
8 9
the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on February 26, 2009 as
.C
~ ~ 10
Op O
a o~ Instrument No. 20090118353 (hereinafter "ADOT-20090118353")
C ~ ~ 11
rn ~
0 Qv
U'T purporting to transferal beneficial interest of the loan referenced within the
00 12
OL
►~ ~,O document into the C WALT 2007-19 Trust. A copy of the ADOT-
_ ~ 13
20090118353 was obtained from the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office
' ~ 14
~ ~~
.~, ;
°~ E
-~
and is attached hereto (attached as "E~chibit-27").
as
.
~~Wn
15
o~
=o
0 ~~ 16
C
NM ~7
~~+ ~vj 1/
y
►
~ J O
.~ ~ 10
A 19
Relief Claims.
20
21
22
23 11:
24
26 THE NOTE OR OTHER EVIDENCE OF INDEBTEDNESS ("the

27 Note")..."
28
-56-
2 Promissory Note and Mortgage on May 8, 2008 in direct violation of
4
5
228. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
6
the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on June 17, 2011 as Instrument
7
No. 20110319965 (hereinafter "ADOT-20110319965") purporting to
8
E 9
transferal beneficial interest of the loan referenced within the document into
8
the CWALT 2007-19 Trust. A copy of the ADOT-20090118353 was
~oE LO
0
~~ obtained from the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office and is attached
~ ~ 11
a -~
UT hereto (attached as "Exhibit-28").
o~
~L
12
C
~ O
_ ~ 13
N
N 229. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-20110319965 is void and not merely voidable and
' E 14
~~ ~~~ that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
~~W 15
; —~
o ~` is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
~J =o
0 ~~ 16 Relief Claims.
N~ ~7
y M 1 /
h
,
. ~ 10
A~ 19
on April 19, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "4-19-11"
20
21 231. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20110319965 states "Together with the
22 notes) or obligations) described in said mortgage or deed of trust,".
23
25 Promissory Note and Mortgage on April 19, 2011 in direct violation of
27 ///
2s ///
-57-
1 233. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
2 the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on August 18, 2011 as Instrument
3 No. 20 110432929 (hereinafter "ADOT-20110432929") purporting to
4 transferal beneficial interest of the loan referenced within the document into
5 the CWALT 2007-19 Trust. A copy of the ADOT-20110432929 was
6 obtained from the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office and is attached
7 hereto (attached as "Exhibit-29").
8
0
a ~ 9
.~3
.C
~ E 10 that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
~o
a o~ is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
m ~ 11
~
0 a~
UT
go Relief Claims.
of 12
.
~ ~,
_ ~ 13
' ~ 14
~ ~~
°~ E on August 9, 2011.
.-~
;,~
~w 15
_~
~: o~
_~
a ~~ 16
0
NM
~ 236. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20110432929 states "TOGETHER WITH
y M 17
►~ J o
THE NOTE OR OTHER EVIDENCE OF INDEBTEDNESS ("the
.~ ~ ~O
Note")..."
A 19
21 Promissory Note and Mortgage on August 9, 2011 in direct violation of
22
23
25 the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on March 9, 2012 as Instrument
26 No. 20120128491 (hereinafter "ADOT-20120128491") purporting to
- 58-

2 hereto (attached as "Exhibit-30").
3
6
7
Relief Claims.
8
L
E 9
8
~o~ 10
o~ 0
~~~ 11 11:
i ~
0 -~
a
.
tomUT
6~
p~ 12
CO OL
~. 241. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20120128491 states "all of Assignor's right,
_ ~ 13
title and interest and to that certain Mortgage dated June 5, 2007".
' E 14
~~ ~~~
-~
~~w 15
; 242. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20120128491 purports to transfer the subject
~;. on
~ _~
a ~~ 16
0 Promissory Note and Mortgage on June 23, 2008 in addition to the
y
L N~
rte
+ M 17
assignment being in direct violation of Securities law and the IRC ADOT-
'
► J p
,
. ~ 10
20120128491 is prima facie evidence that a Foreclosure Action was filed on
A 19 February 2, 2010, two years prior to the assignment of beneficial interest
20 being transferred in direct violation of Florida State Law requiring the
21
assignment of beneficial interest transferred prior to the filing of a
22 foreclosure action.
23
25 the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on June 12, 2012 as Instrument
26 No. 20120303585 (hereinafter "ADOT-20120303585") purporting to
- 59-

2 hereto (attached as "E~ibit-31").
3
4
5
6
7
Relief Claims.
8
E 9
8
on June 8, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "JUN 08
~oE lO
0
~~ 2012".
~ ~ 11
a~
UT
00 12
~L
~ 246. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20120303585 states "...TOGETHER WITH
_~.y
_ ~ 13
THE NOTE(s)..."
' E 14
~ ~~
°~ E
~~W 15
; 247. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20120303585 purports to transfer the subject
on
~. _~
0h
~~ 16 Promissory Note and Mortgage on June 8, 2012 in direct violation of
N~ ^7
M 1 /
h
►~
18
2
_, 19 1 248. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
20 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on February 26, 2009 as
21 Instrument No. 2011262556 (hereinafter "ADOT-2011262556") purporting
22 to transferal beneficial interest of the loan referenced within the document
23 into the CWALT 2007-19 Trust. A copy of the ADOT-2011262556 was
24 obtained from the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office and is attached
25 hereto (attached as "E~ibit-32").
26
- 60-
2 Relief Claims.
3
5 on September 15, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "SEP
6 15 2011".
7
8
E 9 Promissory Note and Mortgage on September 15, 2008 in direct violation of
8
~o~ 10
(p L
O
~ ~ 11
a~
U'T 252. After obtaining nearly three dozen assignments of loans unlawfully
p~ 12
Ot
~. purportedly attempting to transfer loans into the C WALT 2007-19 Trust,
_ ~ 13
Plaintiffs" concerns, surrounding ultra vires acts committed by Defendants
' E 14
~~ ~~ MERS, BONY and CWALT, expanded to worry about other unlawfully acts
-~w
~
.;,~
_ ~ 15 committed by Defendants MERS and BONY.
.-. o~
,~; _~ 16
a
0 ~~
y
iw N~
y M 17
253. Plaintiffs aver that the pattern and practice of Securities and IRC violations
►
~ J p
.~ ~ 10
were not limited to the C WALT 2007-19 Trust.
A 19
20 254. Plaintiffs aver that the pattern and practice of Securities and IRC violations
21 committed by Defendants MERS, BONY and CWALT pertaining to the
22 CWALT 2007-19 Trust also took place in the CWALT, Inc., Alternative
23 Loan Trust 2005-56, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-56
24 (hereinafter "CWALT 2005-56")
25
26 255. Plaintiffs re-allege all preceding paragraphs 52-71 and incorporate them
27 herein as the references SEC and IRC requirements and penalties pertaining
28 to RMEIC Trusts.
-61-
3 beliefs, aver that the Prospectus for the CWALT 2005-56 Trust was filed
4 with the SEC as Form 424B5. was filed under oath with the SEC and is
5
available online at:
6 https://www.sec.~ov/Archives/edgar/data11269518/000095012905009578/v
7
12829e424b5.txt Contained within this Prospectus and its related documents
8 the following information was declared about the investment offering for
0
L
a
~ 9
sale to the public:
C .~8
a
.~
~oE 10
a o~ a) That the Issuer was Alternative Loan Trust 2005-56.
~ ~~, 11
0 a~
U'T
6~
p~ 12
y o~ b) That the Depositor was CWALT, Inc.
~.
_ ~ 13
'~ 14 c) That the Seller was Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.

~~
°~ E
g
'~W
T~ is
_ r~
or
_~
a ~~ 16
d) That the Master Servicer was Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP.
0
y
L NM
y M 17
►
~ J p
e) That the Trustee was The Bank of New York.
6~ ~ 10
•a
A 19
~ That the anticipated material federal income tax consequences were
20 based on REMIC Regulations.
21
22 g) That the Cut-off Date was September 1, 2005.

23
24 h) That the Closing Date was on or about September 29, 2005.
25
257 Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145 are violations of Public Policy
26
27
and 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G for the following reasons:
28
- 62-
2 beliefs aver, that Defendant BONY, as Trustee for the CWALT 2005-56
3 Trust, is the sole gatekeeper for the protection of the Trusts and their
4 beneficial Certificateholders and must at all times, in addition to acting in
5 the best interests of the Trusts, adhere to all statutes and relevant laws
6 pertaining to the pooling and servicing of those loans securitized into the
7 Trusts for which they are Trustee.
8
0
a 9
259. As alleged herein, Plaintiffs aver that Defendant BONY wholly failed to
.@
.~ E 1~
discharge its duties and obligations, as Trustee for the CWALT 2005-56
ao0
a o~
o ~, 1 1
rn m
Trust, to protect the Trusts and comply with public policy and statutory law.
C
0 Q -o
U'T
i
12 Instead, to protect its own business interests, BONY ignored pervasive and
o~
o=
.; _~.N systemic deficiencies in the underlying loan pools and the servicing of those
o ~, 13
_ ~,
~@
>E loans and unreasonably refused to take any action. In addition to causing
14
0 ~~
~W 15 billions of dollars in damages to the Trusts for which Defendant BONY is
m ~_an
o~ =o the Trustee for the CWALT 2005-56 Trust, collateral damage and prejudice
a
0 co 16
o
~~
~. N NM
y
to borrowers have occurred as a result of Defendant BONY's abdication of
y M 17
~
~ J
w 10
responsibility.
A 19
260. Plaintiffs aver the following assignments, in paragraphs 261-381 were
20
purportedly to have been unlawfully transferred into the CWALT 2005-56
21
Trust.
22
23
24
the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on July 23, 2012 as Instrument
25
No. 20120392794. (hereinafter "ADOT-20120392794") A copy of the
26
ADOT-20120392794 was obtained from the Orange County, FL Recorder's
27
28
- 63-
3
5
Relief Claims.
6
7
g
on July 19, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "JUL 19
2012".
'
° ~ 9
°
~R
E 10
ap O
a o~ 264. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20120392794 states "TOGETHER WITH
11
U'T
THE NOTE(S)..."
w ~~
gt 12
R ~c
~
" o
13
a =y 265. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20120392794 purports to transfer the subject
' ~ 14
a o •~ Promissory Note and Mortgage on July 19, 2012 in direct violation of
~ ~E
•~
~ .;~
~w 15 Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2005-56 Trust.
00
o =~ 16
o ~ o0
~ NM 1 ~7
y N 1/
J p
,
.~ W
~ 1O
A 19 No. 20120337094. (hereinafter "ADOT-20120337094") A copy of the
20 ADOT-20120337094 was obtained from the Orange County, FL Recorder's
21
22
26 Relief Claims.
2~ ///
28 ///
-64-
2 on July 20, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "JUL 20
3 2012".
4
5
6
THE NOTE(S)..."
7
8
a
L Promissory Note and Mortgage on July 20, 2012 in direct violation of
~
8 9
~o~ 10
a0
~~
~ ~ 11
0 a -~ 271. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
i UT
00 12
0L
C7
►—, ~.0 the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on August 25, 2008 as Instrument
_ ~ 13
' E 14
~~ ~~ ADOT-20080499144 was obtained from the Orange County, FL Recorder's
.;,~
~w 15
_~
o ~` Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-3 5").
=o
a 16
0 ~~
~~
i NM ~7
y
M ~/
~~ J
. ~ 18
, that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
A 19 is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
20
Relief Claims.
21
23 on May 8, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "MAY 8
24 11:
25
27 THE NOTE(S)..."
28
-65-
2 Promissory Note and Mortgage on June 23, 2008 in direct violation of
4
5 276. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20080499144 purports confirm the date of the
6 assignment as 5/28/2008.
7
8
0
.
~
a ~ 9
the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on May 25, 2012 as Instrument
wC .~
.~ E lO
ap o
~1r o~
C ~~ 11
rn
0 Qv
UT
00 12
y OL
R C
►
~ ~N
~, 13
'E 14
.-~
;,~
~W 15
_~
o^
_~ 16 is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
0 ~~
NM ^7 Relief Claims.
+~+ ~rj 1/
y
C~
`
~ J
.~ ~ 18 279. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20120275444 purports to have been executed
A 19
on May 23, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "5/23/12".
20
21
22
THE NOTE(S)..."
23
27 ~ ///
28 ///
-66-
1 282• Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
2 the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on December 30, 2011 as
3 Instrument No. 201105673480. (hereinafter "ADOT-201105673480") A
4 copy of the ADOT-201105673480 was obtained from the Orange County,
5 FL Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-37").
7
8
0
a
L
~ 9
~.
~ 10
Relief Claims.
~R ap O
a0 ~~ 11
C ~~
0 Qv
L
U'T 284. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-201105673480 purports to have been
y p~ 12
R OL
~, executed on May 8, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on
= y 13
N
N "December 12th,2011".
'E 14
°~ E
.;,~
~w 15
_~
o ~`
=o 285. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-201105673480 purports to transfer the subject
C
0 ~~ 16
~. NM
M 17
Promissory Note and Mortgage on December 12, 2011 in direct violation of
.~ 18
'
_ 19
20
the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on November 23, 2011 as
21
Instrument No. 20110612846. (hereinafter "ADOT-20110612846") A copy
22
of the ADOT-20110612846 was obtained from the Orange County, FL
23
Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-38")
24
27
28
- 67-
2 Relief Claims.
3
5 on November 9, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "11-9-
6 2011".
7
0
L
0. E 9 Promissory Note and Mortgage on November 9, 2011 in addition to the
~, .@ assignment being in direct violation of Securities law and the IRC,
.~d ~oE lO
'a o~ governing the CWALT 2005-56 Trust. ADOT-20120128491 is prima facie
C ~~
rn ~ 11
0 Qv
U'T
00 12 evidence that a Foreclosure Action was filed on February 2, 2010, two years
C~ OL
~ CN prior to the assignment of beneficial interest being transferred in direct
~, 13
' ~ 14 violation of Florida State Law requiring the assignment of beneficial interest
~~ ~~
-~W
~.n 15 transferred prior to the filing of a foreclosure action. Ministerial act LOL
~
or
_~ 16
c ~~
0
NM ^7 290. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
v M 1 /
h
►~ the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on August 30, 2011 as Instrument

r~
.~ 18
A 19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Relief Claims.
26
~ ///
27
~ ///
28
-68-
2 on August 26, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on
3 "8/26/2011".
4
5
6
THE NOTE(S)..."
7
8
L
QI
Promissory Note and Mortgage on August 26, 2008 in direct violation of
~
8 9
R
E lO
Op O
t~ ~\
a
~
~~~ 11
0 Q~
U'T 295. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
00 12
~L
R
,
. ~,N the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on July 7, 2010 as Instrument No.
_ ~ 13
N
f0 20100392872. (hereinafter "ADOT-20100392872") A copy of the ADOT-
'~ 14
°~ E 20100392872 was obtained from the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office
.;,~
~W 15
_~ and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-40")
~: o~
_~
a ~~ 16
0
y
L N~
M 17 296. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-20100392872 is void and not merely voidable and
,
► J o
,
. ~ ~O
A 19 is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
20 Relief Claims.
21
23 on December 31, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "DEC
24 31 2010".
25
27 THE NOTE(S)..."
28
-69-
2 Promissory Note and Mortgage on December 31, 2010 in direct violation of
4
5
6
the Cobb County, GA Recorder's Office on December 18, 2012 as
7
Instrument No. 2012-129306. (hereinafter "ADOT-2012-129306") A copy
8 of the ADOT-2012-129306 was obtained from the Cobb County, GA

0
a E 9 Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-41").
8
~.
C
.~
Op O
~ 10
'a o~ 301. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-2012-129306 is void and not merely voidable and
m~
~ ~ 11
0 a -~
i
. U'T that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
00 12
oL
~. is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
o ~, 13
=y
Relief Claims.
' ~ 14
~~ ~~
.;,~
~W 15
as _ ~ 302. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2012-129306 purports to have been executed
o~
_~
0 ~~ 16
a
on December 13, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "DEC
N~
y M 17
► J p
13 2012".
-
~ 10
A 19 303. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2012-129306 states "TOGETHER WITH

20 THE NOTE(S)..."
21
22 304. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2012-129306 purports to transfer the subject
23 Promissory Note and Security Deed on December 13, 2012 in direct
24 violation of Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2005-56
25 Trust.
26
28 the Cobb County, GA Recorder's Office on August 17, 2011 as Instrument
- 70-
1 No. 2011-0104592. (hereinafter "ADOT-2011-0104592") A copy of the

2 ADOT-2011-0104592 was obtained from the Cobb County, GA Recorder's
3 Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-42")
4
5 306. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-2011-0104592 is void and not merely voidable and
7
g Relief Claims.
0
L
~' $ 9
w ~ 307. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011-0104592 purports to have been executed
~R ~ 10
~L
a O~ on August 10, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on"8/10/11"

11
U'
w ~0
gt 12
R gc 308. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011-0104592 states "TOGETHER WITH
v~ 5
O,~
N 13
=N THE NOTE(S)..."
'
a o ~ 14
~ °~ E
.~ ~w 1 S
ca a~ ~ 309. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011-0104592 purports to transfer the subject
~ _~ a 16
y ~~ Promissory Note and Security Deed on August 10, 2011 in direct violation
~ NM
N I7
J p
6 ~ W
~ 1O
.~
Cd
A 19 310. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
20 the Deschutes County, OR Recorder's Office on May 31, 2011 as Instrument
21 No. 2011-19843. (hereinafter "ADOT-2011-19843") A copy of the ADOT-
22 2011-19843 was obtained from the Deschutes County, OR Recorder's
24
25 311. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-2011-19843 is void and not merely voidable and that
26 Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there is a
27 very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
28 Relief Claims.
-71-
2
312. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011-19843 purports to have been executed
3
4
2011"
5
313. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011-19843 states "TOGETHER WITH THE
6
NOTE OR NOTES..."
7
8
314. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011-19843 purports to transfer the subject
a, ~ 9
~. Promissory Note and Mortgage on May 25, 2011 in direct violation of
.~ ~ 10
~o Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2005-56 Trust.
a o~
~ ~m 11
0 Q~
i U'T
00 12
OL
~C
►
~ _ y
~, 13
N
f0
the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on July 25, 2012 as Instrument
'E 14
~~ No. 2012213533. (hereinafter "ADOT-2012213533") A copy of the ADOT-
-~
~~W
; 15
o~ 2012213533 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office
_~ 16
a
0 ~~ and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-44").
h
it NM
+~+ M 1~
y
`
~ J o
.~ ~ 10 316. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-2012213533 is void and not merely voidable and
A 19 that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
21 Relief Claims.
22
24 on July 25, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "JUL 20
25 2012".
26
27
28
NOTE(S)..."
-72-
2
3
Promissory Note and Mortgage on July 25, 2012 in direct violation of
4
5
6
the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on May 25, 2012 as Instrument
7
No. 2012154880.(hereinafter "ADOT-2012154880") A copy of the ADOT-
8
L 2012154880 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office
~" I $ 9
and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-45").
r
~~(gy
pL E IO
QI O
11
o a -o
U'T 321. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-2012154880 is void and not merely voidable and
+°+ ~
gt~ IZ
R gc that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
~ 5~" 13
,
~ =N is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
' ~ 14
w o •~
~ °~ E
Relief Claims.
.~
~ ~W 15
~ ~T~
~ _~ 16
y ~~ .322. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2012154880 purports to have been executed
~ N~
v ~~
J p
1O
.~
~ W
~
2U 12".
A 19
20 323. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2012154880 states "TOGETHER WITH THE
21 NOTE(S)..."
22
26
28 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on December 15, 2011 as
- 73-
1 Instrument No. 2011330936. (hereinafter "ADOT-2011330936") A copy of

2 the ADOT-2011330936 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL
3 Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-46").
4
5
6
7
8
Relief Claims.
0
a E 9
C
~R Op O
E 10
a
,0~~ on November 30, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on
~ ~ 11
0 a -~
U'T
cam.' "11/30/11".
00 12
~L
C
►
~ ~ O
_ ~ 13
'E 14
~~ NOTE OR OTHER EVIDENCE OF INDEBTEDNESS ("the Note")..."
~~w 15
;
_~
on
_~
0 ~~ 16 329. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011330936 purports to transfer the subject
N~ ~7
~ ~ /
Promissory Note and Mortgage on November 30, 2011 in direct violation of
►
] J
.~ ~ 18 Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2005-56 Trust.
A 19
20
21
the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on December 15, 2011 as
24 Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-47").
25
28
- 74-

2 Relief Claims.
3
5 on November 30, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "Nov
6
30, 2011".
7
8
a E 9
NOTE OR OTHER EVIDENCE OF INDEBTEDNESS ("the Note")..."
8
~.
wC
.~ ~ 1~
0p O
a0 334. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011330933 purports to transfer the subject
~~ 11
C ~~
0Q v
U T Promissory Note and Mortgage on November 30, 2011 in direct violation of
y 00 12
R OL
~.0 Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2005-56 Trust.
_ ~ 13
' E 14
~~ ~~~ 335. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
~~w 15
;
the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on October 31, 2011 as
~~ o~
_~
a ~~ 16
0
N~
Instrument No. 2011287646. (hereinafter "ADOT-2011287646") A copy of
rte
+ M I7
J p
the ADOT-2011287646 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL
/
~
~ 10
.w Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-48").
A 19
20
21
23 Relief Claims.
24
26 on October 24, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "10-24-
27 11"
28
-75-
1 ~ ~ 338. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011287646 states "TOGETHER WITH THE
2 NOTE(S)..."
3
5
Promissory Note and Mortgage on October 24, 2011 in direct violation of
8
0
L
Qti E 9 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on October 27, 2011 as
.~
E lO
~R Op O
~~`
Q~
~~ 11
0 a -~
U'T
00 12
Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-49").
~L
C0 g c
~ 5,y
~
o ~, 13
_~
' E 14
.-~
;,~
~w 15
i~ _ ~
or
_~ is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
a 16
0 ~~
~~
L NM Relief Claims.
rte
y
+ M 17
~ 10
.~
-~ 19
on July 21, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "July 21,
20
2011".
21
23 PROMISSORY NOTE..."
24
26 Promissory Note and Mortgage on July 21, 2011 in direct violation of
28
- 76-
1 ~ ~ 345 Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
2 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on October 17, 2011 as
6
7
8
0
L
a ~ 9
~8
.
C
.~ ~ 10
Relief Claims.
ap o
C~ o~
rn m
C ~ °~ 11
0 Qv
UT 347. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011274904 purports to have been executed
H
00 12
O=
R
,
► ~. N
on October 7, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on
~, 13
~~ "10/7/2011"
~'- E 14
0 a~ ~
~W 15
as _T~
~ 348. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011274904 states "TOGETHER WITH THE
on
_~
c ~~ 16
0 NOTE(S)..."
NM ~7
+~+ M 1 /
h
.~ ~ 10
,
_ 19
20
21
22
23
the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on September 27, 2011 as
24
25
26
Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-51").
27
///
2s
-~~-
4 Relief Claims.
5
6
7
on September 22, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "9-22-
8
11".
0
c,
~r
~ 9
.~3 353. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011274904 states "TOGETHER WITH THE
C
E lO
~R Op O
a o~ NOTE(S)..."
~ ~~, 11
0 Q~
U'T
00 12
y oL 354. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011274904 purports to transfer the subject
►~ ~.N
;
, 13
N
N @
Promissory Note and Mortgage on September 22, 2011 in direct violation of
~'- ~ 14
~ ~~ Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2005-56 Trust.
°~ E
~_~w
~~ 15
o~
_~
0a ~~ 16 355. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
NM
M 17
►j J
the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on August 10, 2011 as Instrument
c~
.~ ~ 18
No. 2011210995. (hereinafter "ADOT-2011210995") A copy of the ADOT-
A 19
2011210995 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office
20
and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-52").
21
25 Relief Claims.
26
///
27
///
2s
-~s-
2 on July 25, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "July 25,
3 2011"
4
5 Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011210995 purports to transfer the subject

8
E 9 359. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment ofthe Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
8
~.
~ 10 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on November 1, 2010 as
~o
o~
m ~~, 11
~ Instrument No. 2010307841. (hereinafter "ADOT-2010307841") A copy of
a~
U'T
00 12 the ADOT-2010307841 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL
OL
~c
0 13 Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-53").
=y
' E 14
~ ~~
°~ E
-~ 360. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-2010307841 is void and not merely voidable and
.
~~W 15
;
n
on
_~ that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
a ~~ 16
0
~. N ~
h
y v 17
i J
~ 18
Relief Claims.
.~
A 19
20
21
2010".
22
23
24
NOTE..."
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
-79-
4
6 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on June 24, 2010 as Instrument
7 No. 2010177764.(hereinafter "ADOT-2010177764") A copy of the ADOT-
8 2010177764 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office
0
L
~' I ~ 9 and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-54").
.~
E 10
~R op O
QI pL
~ ~~ 11
L
w ~~
U T
gt 12
R g c
~ 5'" 13
_~
'
Relief Claims.
a o ~ 14
~ °~ E
.~~ ~w 15
ca T~ ~
~ _~ 16
~~
~ NM ~7 on August 11, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "MAY 8
r"~ N ~ /
h v
J p 2UU8".
~ F"
W 1O
.~
A 19
20 I I NOTE..."
21
22
24
25
27 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on May 27, 20010 as Instrument
28
- 80-
1 No. 2010147882. (hereinafter "ADOT-2010147882") A copy of the ADOT-

2 2010147882was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office
3 and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-55").
4
5
7
8
Relief Claims.
0
L
~
8 9
C 371. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2010147882 purports to have been executed
~oE 10
a0
~~ on May 20, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "20 day of
C ~ ~ 11
0 Qv
m U'T
to, MAY 2010".
p~ 12
R OL
~C
►
~
_ ~ 13
N
' ~ 14
~~
°~ E
-~
Promissory Note and Mortgage on May 20, 2010 in direct violation of
~W
T~
15
_n
on
_~ 16 Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2005-56 Trust.
a
0 ~~
y
iw N M ^7
~d+ M 1 /
y
.~ 18
the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on May 27, 2010 as Instrument
A 19
20
21
and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-56").
22
23
24
25
26
Relief Claims.
27
28
-81-
2 on May 19, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "19 day of
3 MAY 2010".
4
8
0
.
~
a E 9 377. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
.~8
C
•R E 10 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on July 6, 2009 as Instrument No.
0p O
~~,
a
~
~~~ 11 2009175196. (hereinafter "ADOT-2009175196") A copy of the ADOT-
0 a -~
U T
00 12
0L
Rgc
►
~ 50
'
_ 13 and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit-57").
' E 14
~~ ~~
_
~w
T~n
~:; o
~. _~ ~`
0 ~~ 16
~~
i. N~
+~+ M 17 is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
.~ Relief Claims.
.~ ~ 18 I
A 19
20
on June 12, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on " 12 day of
21
June 2009".
22
23
24
NOTE ..."
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
-82-
4
6 were not limited to the CWALT 2007-19 and the CWALT 2005-56 Trusts.
7
8
L
a E 9
committed by Defendants MERS, BONY and CWALT were not limited to
8
.~ the CWALT 2007-19 and the CWALT 2005-56 Trusts.
.C
~ E lO
~o
a0~~
c ~ ~ 11
0 a~
UT 384. Plaintiffs aver that the pattern and practice of Securities and IRC violations
00 12
R OL
committed by Defendants MERS, BONY and CWALT also took place in
_~.~
_ ~ 13
N
f0 the CWALT, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2006-6CB, Mortgage Pass-
' E 14
~~ ~~~ Through Certificates, Series 2006-6CB (hereinafter"CWALT 2006-6CB")
.-~
;,~
~w 15
as
on
_~
a ' ~~ 16
0
y
385. Plaintiffs re-allege all preceding paragraphs 52-71 and incorporate them
L NM
M 17
herein as the references SEC and IRC requirements and penalties pertaining
/-~ J
. ~ 18
, to RMEIC Trusts.
A 19
I.1 ~ 386. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
21 beliefs, aver that the Prospectus for the CWALT 2006-6CB Trust was filed
23 available online at: https://www.sec.~ov Contained within this Prospectus
24 and its related documents the following information was declared about the
25 investment offering for sale to the public:
26 a) That the Issuer was Alternative Loan Trust 2006-6CB.
27
b) That the Depositor was CWALT,Inc.
28
- 83-
2 c) That the Seller was Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
3
d) That the Master Servicer was Countrywide Home Loans Servicing
4
LP.
5
6 e) That the Trustee was The Bank of New York.

7
8 ~ That the anticipated material federal income tax consequences were

E 9 based on REMIC Regulations.
.~
~oE 10
o~ g) That the Cut-off Date was March 1, 2006.
~ ~~, 11
a
UT
-~
00 12
o= h) That the Closing Date was on or about March 30, 2006.
~,
o ;, 13
_~
~~
~'- ~ 14
°~ E
~~_~W
.~ 15 beliefs aver, that Defendant BONY, as Trustee for the CWALT 2006-6CB
or
_~ 16
0 ~~ Trust, is the sole gatekeeper for the protection of the Trusts and their
NM
rte
+ M 17
J
.CT~ ~ 18 the best interests of the Trusts, adhere to all statutes and relevant laws
A 19
pertaining to the pooling and servicing of those loans securitized into the
20
Trusts for which they are Trustee.
21
22 388. As alleged herein, Plaintiffs aver that Defendant BONY wholly failed to
23 discharge its duties and obligations, as Trustee for the CWALT 2006-6CB
24 Trust, to protect the Trusts and comply with public policy and statutory law.
26 systemic deficiencies in the underlying loan pools and the servicing of those
27 loans and unreasonably refused to take any action. In addition to causing
28 billions of dollars in damages to the Trusts for which Defendant BONY is
- 84-
1 the Trustee for the CWALT 2006-6CB Trust, collateral damage and
2 prejudice to borrowers have occurred as a result of Defendant BONY's
3 abdication of responsibility.
4
5
6
purportedly to have been unlawfully transferred into the CWALT 2006-6CB
7
Trust.
~ 9
~.3
the Lake County, FL Recorder's Office on March 24, 2010 as Instrument
~oE lO
o~ No. 2010029709.(hereinafter "ADOT-2010029709") A copy of the ADOT-
~ ~~, 11
a -~
U'T
00 12
2010029709 was obtained from the Lake County, FL Recorder's Office and
Ot
~C
~, 13
is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-58").
N
f0
' E 14
~~ ~~
-~~W 15
T~
_~
o~
_~ 16 that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
0 ~~
NM ^7 is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
y M 1 /
H
/~ J Relief Claims.
.~ ~ lg
A 19
20
on February 22, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "22 day
21
of February 2010".
22
24 NOTE..."
25
27 Promissory Note and Mortgage on February 22, 2010 in direct violation of
28 Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2006-6CB Trust.
- 85-
3 the Lake County, FL Recorder's Office on October 12, 2010 as Instrument
4
5 2010102349 was obtained from the Lake County, FL Recorder's Office and
6
is attached hereto (attached as "E~chibit-59").
7
8
L that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
a p 9
Sri U
E 10
•R (p L
°~ ~~ Relief Claims.
11
ice U T
.
~ ~~ 1~
ì' O L
13
,C' = N on September 29, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "Sept
' E 14
a o ~~
~ ~E 29, 2010".
..
. -~
., ~w 15
T~
~ ~ 16 398. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2010102349 states "TOGETHER WITH THE
o ~~
~ NM
v ~~
NOTE..."
J p
~ W
~ 1O
.~
a 19 399. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2010102349 purports to transfer the subject
20 Promissory Note and Mortgage on September 29, 2010 in direct violation of
22
24 recorded in the Johnston County, NC Recorder's Office on June 17, 2013 as
26 the ADOT-2013388108 was obtained from the Johnston County, NC
28 ~ ///
-86-
4 Relief Claims.
5
6
7 on June 8, 2013 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "6~ 8❑2013".

g
~" ~ 9
~ NOTE..."
'~ ~ 10
•R (p L
a o@~
11
U' 404. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2013388108 purports to transfer the subject
~0
gt 12
R ~c
o
Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on June 8, 2013 in direct violation of
13
_~ Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2006-6CB Trust.
'
a o ~ 14
~ ~E
.~, ~w 1 S
a"a T~ ~ 405. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Deed of Trust, was
~ _~ a 16
y ~~ recorded in the Deschutes County, OR Recorder's Office on September 6,
~ N C7 ~7
r"'
v
N 1 /
2011 as Instrument No. 2011-031135. (hereinafter "ADOT-2011-031135")
J
. W 18
, A copy of the ADOT-201 1-03 1 135 was obtained from the Deschutes
A 19
County, OR Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit-
20 61~~~
21
22 406. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-2011-031135 is void and not merely voidable and
25 Relief Claims.
26 ///
27 ///
2s ///
-g~-
1 407. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011-03 1135 purports to have been executed
2 on August 31, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on
3 "08/31/2011".
4
5
408. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011-031135 states "TOGETHER WITH
6 THE NOTE(S)..."
7
8
Promissory Note and Deed of Trust on August 31, 2011 in direct violation of
~
8 9
Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2006-6CB Trust.
~oE lO
~~
0
~ ~ 11
Q~
U'T 410. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
p0 12
OL
~, the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on July 15, 2010 as Instrument
_ y
_ ~ 13
> E 14
~~ ~~~ 2010199068 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office
.-~
;,~
~w 15
on and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 62").
_~ 16
a ~~
0
y
N ~j
y M 17
'
► J o
,
. ~ ~O
Ai 19 is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
20 Relief Claims.
21
23
NOTE..."
24
26 on July 9, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "JUL 09 2010".
27 ~ ///
Zs ///
-ss-
4
6 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on April 9, 2012 as Instrument
~ 9 and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit 63").
.~
~o E lO
o~ 416. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-2012100914 is void and not merely voidable and
~~ ~ 11
a -~
U'a
00 12
o~
~, is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
~, 13
'~ 14
Relief Claims.
'
° E
-~
~W 15
T~
_~
Or
_~
16
~ 417. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2012100914 states "TOGETHER WITH THE
0 ~~
+~+
NM
M 17
NOTE(S)..."
`
~ J
.~ ~ 18
A 19
on April 4, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "APR 04
20
2012".
21
22
23
Promissory Note and Mortgage on April 4, 2012 in direct violation of
24
25
26
27
the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on March 15, 2012 as Instrument
28
- 89-

3 and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 64").
4
5
6
7
8
Relief Claims.
0
L
a E 9
8
@.
E lO
422. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2012100914 states "THE MORTGAGE..."
~R Op O
(O
a a~
~~
C ~ ~~ 11
O Qv
UT 423. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2012100914 purports to have been executed
o~
~L
12
R
~.0 on January 20, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "Jan. 20
13
►
~ ~Ij~►~
' E 14
~~ ~~
-~
;~W 15
~_~
on
_~ 16 424. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2012100914 purports to transfer the subject
0 ~~
~~
d NM ~7 Promissory Note and Mortgage on January 20, 2012 in addition to the
y ~vj 1/
assignment being in direct violation of Securities law and the IRC governing
.~ 18
the CWALT 2006-6CB Trust. The ADOT-20120128491 is prima facie
A 19
evidence that a Foreclosure Action was filed on December 28, 2009, more
20
two years prior to the assignment of beneficial interest being transferred in
21
direct violation of Florida State Law requiring the assignment of beneficial
22
interest transferred prior to the filing of a foreclosure action.
23
24
25
the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on February 7, 2012 as
26
27
28
.~

2 Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 65").
3
6
7
Relief Claims.
8
0
L
a E 9 427. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2012035683 states "THE MORTGAGE..."
y .~8
.~
~ oE lO
C
a0
~ ~ 11
0 a~
L
U'T on January 9, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "9 day of
00
o f 12
~,N January, 2012".
a _ ~ 13
'E 14
~ ~~
°~ E 429. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2012035683 purports to transfer the subject
~w 15
;~
. n
.-. on
,~; _ ~ 16 Promissory Note and Mortgage on January 9, 2012 in direct violation of
a
0 ~~
:V ~ ~7 Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2006-6CB Trust.
h ~ 1/
GC
►
~ J
~ 18 I
A 19
20
21
22
Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit 66").
23
24
25
26
27
Relief Claims.
28
-91-
3 NOTE(S)..."
4
5
6
on January 30, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on
7
"1/3 0/2012".
8
0
a
L
E 9 434. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2012029208 purports to transfer the subject
S
.~
E lO
Promissory Note and Mortgage on January 30, 2012 in direct violation of
~R Op O
f0a\
a
0 ~~
rn ~ 11
0 Qv
U'T
o~
~L
12
►0 ~0c
C
, 435. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
_ ~ 13
' E 14
the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on January 18, 2012 as
o -~
a~ ~
-~ Instrument No. 2012013424. (hereinafter "ADOT-2012013424") A copy of
~~w
;
- ~
15
o~
~: _~ the ADOT-2012013424 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL
a ~~ 16
0
NM ~7
h M ~/
~ 10
.~
A 19
20
21
Relief Claims.
22
23
24
NOTE(S)..."
25
~ ///
26
///
27
///
2s
-92-
2 on January 12, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "JAN 12
3 hIljf►.~
4
6 Promissory Note and Mortgage on January 12, 2012 in direct violation of
8
0
L
a E 9 440. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
8
.~
._C E 10 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on October 26, 201 as Instrument
(
gy
pL
QI O
C ~~ 11 No. 2011283032. (hereinafter "ADOT-2011283032") A copy of the ADOT-

0 Qv
UT
00 12
~L
CQ C
►
~ ~ O
and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 68").
_~ 13
' E 14
~~
~~w 15
as ;
on
_~ that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
a ~~ 16
0
y ~~
NM
I7
18
Relief Claims.
.~
~_ 19
20
21 NOTE(S)..."
22
23
on October 18, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "OCT 18
24
2011"
25
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
-93-
2 Promissory Note and Mortgage on October 18, 2011 in direct violation of
4
5 445. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment ofthe Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
6 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on September 26, 2011 as
g the ADOT-2011253696 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL
0
a ~ 9 Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 69").
~~
~R c0 O
E 10
O~
11
a -~
U'T
+
~+ ~ ~ 12
~ OL
~ —"
~
,O
o ~, 13
.~ _ ~,
'
Relief Claims.
a o E 14
~ ~E
.^
~ -~
~W 15
~ ~~~
~ _~ 16
o ~~
~ NM
N 17
~ v
J p 448. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011253696 purports to have been executed
~ W
~ 1O
.~
on January 30, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on
A 19
"1/30/2012".
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-94-

2 and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit 70")
3
6
7
Relief Claims.
8
0
a E 9 452. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2411225688 states "TOGETHER WITH THE
.~
E lO
NOTE(S)..."
~R OD O
~ a,
Qti
C ~~ 11
O Q'O
i U T 453. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011225688 purports to have been executed
o~
~L
12
C3
►~' ~.0 on August 24, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on
_ ~ 13
"8/24/2011".
' E 14
~~
~~W 15
;
_~
or
_~ 16 454. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011225688 purports to transfer the subject
C
O ~~
NM Promissory Note and Mortgage on August 24, 2011 in direct violation of
h M 17
.~ 18
A 19
20
the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on April 5, 2010 as Instrument
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 95-

2 Relief Claims.
3
5 NOTE(S)..."
6
7
8
on March 18, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "18t" day of
0
a.
~
~ 9
March, 2010".
w ~.
.~ ~ 10
~o
a o~ 459. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2010090303 purports to transfer the subject
C ~~ 11
O>
O Q'0
U'T
L
00 12
R o=
~c
►, Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2006-6CB Trust.
o ~, 13
=N
N ~
' ~ 14
~ ~~
' ° E
.-~
;,~
~w 15
PQ _ ~•
o~
_~ committed by Defendants MERS, BONY and CWALT were not limited to
o ~ ~~ 16
~. NM ^7
the CWALT 2007-19, the CWALT 2005-56 and the 2006-6CB Trusts.
yh M 1/
~ ~O
.~
-, 19
20
the CWALT, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2005-62, Mortgage Pass-Through
21
Certificates, Series 2005-62 (hereinafter "CWALT 2005-62")
22
23
462. Plaintiffs re-allege all preceding paragraphs 52-71 and incorporate them
24
25
to RMEIC Trusts.
26
~//
27
///
28
-96-
1 463 Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
2 beliefs, aver that the Prospectus for the CWALT 2005-62 Trust was filed
4 available online at:
5 https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data11269518/000095012905010375/v
6 13639e424b5.txt Contained within this Prospectus and its related
7 documents the following information was declared about the investment
8 offering for sale to the public:
0
.
~
a E 9 a) That the Issuer was Alternative Loan Trust 2005-62.
8
w ~.
.~ ~ 10
~o b) That the Depositor was CWALT,Inc.
'a o~
~ ~,
~ 11
0 a -~
U'T
rte
+ p0 12
o =. c) That the Seller was Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
~.N
a =N
o ;, 13
l9
'E 14 d) That the Master Servicer was Countrywide Home Loans Servicing
~°~ ~~E
-~~W
; ~ 15 LP.
. n
o~
=o
c ~~ 16
0
NM ~7 e) That the Trustee was The Bank of New York.
+~+ M 1/
h
~ 10
.C~r ~ That the anticipated material federal income tax consequences were
A 19
based on REMIC Regulations.
20
21 g) That the Cut-off Date was October 1, 2005.

22
23 h) That the Closing Date was on or about October 31, 2005.
24
26 beliefs aver, that Defendant BONY, as Trustee for the CWALT 2005-62
- 97-
4
5 465 As alleged herein, Plaintiffs aver that Defendant BONY wholly failed to
6 discharge its duties and obligations, as Trustee for the CWALT 2005-62
0
L
a E 9 systemic deficiencies in the underlying loan pools and the servicing of those
.@
~R
E 10 loans and unreasonably refused to take any action. In addition to causing
Op O
~~1
a
O
~ ~ 11 billions of dollars in damages to the Trusts for which Defendant BONY is
0 a -~
U'~
o~
0L
12 the Trustee for the CWALT 2005-62 Trust, collateral damage and prejudice
C0 c
►
~ ~ 0
to borrowers have occurred as a result of Defendant BONY's abdication of
13
N
N
'E 14 responsibility.
~~
.-~
;,~
~w 15
_~
o~
=o
0 ~~ 16 466. Plaintiffs aver the following assignments, in paragraphs 467-556 were
0 ~~
i N~
y
y M I7 purportedly to have been unlawfully transferred into the CWALT 2005-62
18 Trust.
,
.
A 19
21 the San Diego County, CA Recorder's Office on October 18, 2010 as
22 Instrument No. 2010-0556479. (hereinafter "ADOT-2010-0556479") A
23 copy of the ADOT-2010-0556479 was obtained from the San Diego County,
24 CA Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 72").
25
26
468. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-2010-0556479 is void and not merely voidable and
27
28
- 98-

2 Relief Claims.
3
4 ~ ~ 469. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2010-0556479 states "TOGETHER WITH
5 THE NOTE or NOTES..."

6
7
8 on October 1, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" on "October

0
L
o 9
O1, 2010".
U
~.
i:r
C
~ 1~
~R Op O
CO ~`
a
o~
i ~ ~ 11
0 a
UT
-~
00 12
R OL
~C
►~ Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2005-62 Trust.
_ ~ 13
N
f0
' E 14
~ ~~
D °~ E
-~ 472. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
~~W 15
oa ;
—n
on
_~ the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on June 3, 2008 as Instrument No.
a
0 ~~ 16
~.
y
NM
20080323004. (hereinafter "ADOT-20080323004") A copy of the ADOT-
y M l~
18
,
.
A 19
and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit 73").
20
21
22
23
Relief Claims.
24
25
~ 474. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20080323004 states "MORTGAGE
26
TOGETHER WITH THE..."
27
28
..
2 on May 12, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" May 12, 2008".
3
4 ~ ~' ~ Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20080323004 purports to transfer the subject
7
0
.~
~' $ 9 the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on June 3, 2008 as Instrument No.
:, ~~
:
~= (gy
pL E 10 20080323004. (hereinafter "ADOT-20080323004") A copy of the ADOT-
a ~~
11 20080323004 was obtained from the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office
i Uv
+°+ ~~ and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 74").

o =. 12
~~
a =~;
13
' ~~ .. 14 478. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-20080323004 is void and not merely voidable and
a o ~•E
~ ~E
~w 15
T~
~ ~ 16
o ~~
N~
N 17
Relief Claims.
y M
.~ W 18
A 19
20
THE NOTE(S)..."
21
~ 480. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20080323004 purports to have been executed
22
on May 12, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" May 12, 2008".
23
24
25
26
27
28
- 100 -
2 the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on June 29, 2009 as Instrument
3 No. 20090359312. (hereinafter "ADOT-20090359312") A copy of the
5 Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit 75").
6
7
0
a
.
~ E 9 is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
3
.~
.C
~ E 10 Relief Claims.
~o
'a o~
C ~~
rn ~ 11
O Qv
U'T
d 00 12 484. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20090359312 states "TOGETHER WITH
C~ Ot
C
~ N THE NOTE(S)..."
o ;, 13
=N
N
' E 14
~~ ~~~
~_~W
a~ 15
o~
_~ on Apri129, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" 4/29/2009".
a 16
0 ~~
h
L NM ~7
ai
r M 1/
H
.~ ~ 18 I
A 19
20
21
22
the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on March 23, 2010 as Instrument
23
24
25
26
///
27
///
28
-101-
4 Relief Claims.
5
7 NOTE..."
8
0
L
a E 9 490. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2010163733 purports to have been executed
8
~.
.C
~ ~ 10 on March 8, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" 8`h day of March
~o
a0~~ 11 2010".
C ~~
0 Qv
L
UT
~~ 1G
OL
R ~c
_y 491. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2010163733 purports to transfer the subject
_ ~ 13
N
f0
' E 14
Promissory Note and Mortgage on March 8, 2010 in direct violation of
~~
-~ Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2005-62 Trust.
~~W 15
;
_~
on
_~
a ~~ 16
0
~, N ~
y
17
~
~ J
~ 18
.~
A 19
No. 2010034171.(hereinafter "ADOT-2010034171")A copy of the ADOT-
20
21
22
23
24
25
Relief Claims.
26
///
27
///
28
- 102 -
2 NOTE..."
3
5
on February 22, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" 22°d day of
6
February 2010".
8
0
a.
~
~ 9
Promissory Note and Mortgage on February 22, 2010 in direct violation of
.@
C
.~ E lO
ap o
~1r o~
e ~ ~
rn ~ 11
0 Qv
m U'T
to, 497. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
go 12
o=
~. the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on August 3, 2010 as Instrument
~, 13
N
[0
' ~ 14
~ ~~
~E
-~ ADOT-20100447723 was obtained from the Orange County, FL Recorder's
~~W 15
; _n
o~
_~ 16 Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 78").
a ~~
0
H
iw NM ^7
a~.~ M 1 /
y
►~ 498. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-20100447723 is void and not merely voidable and
.~ 18
A 19
20
Relief Claims.
21
22
23
THE NOTE..."
24
25
~ 500. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20100447723 purports to have been executed
26
on November 4, 2098 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" "NOV 04
27
2009".
28
-103-
2 ~~ 501. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20100447723 purports to transfer the subject
3 Promissory Note and Mortgage on November 4, 2098 in direct violation of

5
7 the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on August 15, 2011 as Instrument
0
L
a E 9 ADOT-20110428724 was obtained from the Orange County, FL Recorder's
8
.~
.~ ~ 10 Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit 79").
~o
a o~
C ~~
rn ~ 11
O Qv
U'T
i
00 12
CAS OL
C
~ that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
_ ~N 13
' ~ 14
~~ ~~
.-~
;,~
~W 15
Relief Claims.
as _ ~
o~
_~
a ~~ 16
~.
y
NM ~7
i M 1 /
y
.~ 18
~_ 505. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20080323004 purports to have been executed
19
on July 25, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" 25th day of July
20
2011".
21
22
23
24
25
26
507. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment ofthe Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
27
the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on October 4, 2011 as Instrument
28
- 104 -

3 Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit 80").
4
7
8
Relief Claims.
0
.
~
a ~ 9
.@
C
.~ ~ 1~
a0 O
~~
rn
~~
O
11
C
0 Qv
U "T 510. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20110523670 purports to have been executed
p 0 IZ
y OL
► ~.0 on September 19, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" "19th day
C~
,
o ~, 13
_~
of September 2011".
'E
ò ~@ 14
~£
-~~W 15
_ T~
n
or
_~ 511. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20110523670 purports to transfer the subject
0 ~~ 16
N (~~ j 7 Promissory Note and Mortgage on September 19, 2011 in direct violation of
H M 17
CC
~~ Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2005-62 Trust.
.~ 18
A 19
20
the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on October 4, 2011 as Instrument
21
22
23
Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit 81").
24
25
26
27
28
- 105 -
2 Relief Claims.
3
4 514. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20110523693 states "THE MORTGAGE..."
5
7 on September 19, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" "19th day
8 of September 2011".
L
0
a
~ 9
.~8
C
.~ ~ l~
ap o
a 0
~~ Promissory Note and Mortgage on September 19, 2011 in direct violation of
C ~~ 11
0 Qv
UT
00 12 Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2005-62 Trust.
R OL
~C
i
_ ~N 13
' ~ 14 517. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
~ ~~
~E
-~W
~
.;,~ the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on October 10, 2011 as Instrument
i~ -n 15
on
_~ No. 20110531867. (hereinafter "ADOT-20110531867") A copy of the
a
0 ~~ 16
~y, N M ADOT-20110531867 was obtained from the Orange County, FL Recorder's
y ~ 17
h
18 Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 82").

,
.
A 19
20
21
22
Relief Claims.
23
24
25
THE NOTE(S)..."
26
~ ///
27
~ ///
28
- 106 -
2 on September 20, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" "20th day
3 of September 2011".
4
8
E 9 522. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
8
.@
~oE 10
the Orange County, FL Recorder's Office on February 13, 2012 as
o~
~ ~ 11 Instrument No. 20120075452. (hereinafter "ADOT-20120075452") A copy
Q -~
U'a
00 12 of the ADOT-20120075452 was obtained from the Orange County, FL
O'c
~c
~N, 13 Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 83").

' E 14
~ ~~
°~ E
-~
emu' 15
;
~_~
o~
~. _~ that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
0
a ~~ 16
.
~
y
NM
y M 17
CC
J
Relief Claims.
. ~ 18
,
AI 19
20
21
THE NOTE(S)..."
22
23
on February 9, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" "2/9/2012".
24
25
26
27
28
- 107 -
3 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on June 3, 2008 as Instrument
5 ADOT-20080323004 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's
6 Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 84").
7
8
0
L
Qw
~ 9
8
y ~ .
.~
g ~ 10
ao0
~L o~
~ ~ 11 Relief Claims.
Q~
0U T
i
00 12
R oL
.
~ ~. 529. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20080323004 states "TOGETHER WITH
_ ~ 13
y
l0
'~ 14
THE NOTE(S)..."
~~
-~
~~W
; 15
—n
on
_~ 16 ~ 530. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20080323004 purports to have been executed
a ~~
0
NM ~7 on May 12, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" May 12, 2008".
rte
+ ~ rj 1 /
y
J
H 18 I
A 19
20
21
22
532. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment ofthe Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
23
24
25
26
Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 85").
27
///
28
- 108 -
4 Relief Claims.
5
7 NOTE(S)..."
g
0
~' ~ 9
:- ~~ on August 30, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:""8/30/11".
C ~ oE lO
'~
a o~
11
~ U~~. 536. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-201 1232742 purports to transfer the subject
°~ ~~ 12
or
~~
o ~, 13
,a=~,
' Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2005-62 Trust.
a oE 14
~ °' E
.~
~ ~w 15
T~
o~0 537. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
p ~ 16
o ~n ~
~ NM the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on July 14, 2011 as Instrument
y M 17
J No. 2011184782.(hereinafter "ADOT-2011184782") A copy of the ADOT-
.~ ~ 1g i
201 1 1 84782 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office
AI 19
20
21
22
23
24
Relief Claims.
25
26
27
NOTE(S)..."
28
- 109 -
3
on July 11, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:""7-11-11"
5 541. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-201 1 1 84782 purports to transfer the subject
6
g
~' ~ 9
'~ ~ oE 10
a oL Instrument No. 2010041775. (hereinafter "ADOT-2010041775") A copy of
~ ~m 11
to.'
m V `>. the ADOT-2010041775 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL
~0
gr 12
R ~c
Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~chibit 847").
y o ~,N 13
a = ~,
'
a o~ 14
.°~ -~~W 15
a'a ~ °° that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
a3 =~ 16
o ~n ~ is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
~ NM
r"' N 17
y M
J
Relief Claims.
;
.~, ~ 18
A 19
20
NOTE..."
21
22
23 on September 17, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" 17TH day
24 of September, 2010".
25
///
26
~ ///
27
~ ///
28
- 110 -
4
6 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on February 8, 2010 as

0
~,
a ~ 9 Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit 88")
8
wC ~.
.~ ~o~ 10
a0 ~~ 11 548. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-2010034274 is void and not merely voidable and
C ~~
0 Qv
y
00 12
C~ O L
~ ~.0
j is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
13
Relief Claims.
' ~~ ..
E 14
~~ ~~
.;,~
~w 15
_~
as o~
_~ 549. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2010034274 states "TOGETHER WITH THE
~~ 16
0 ~~
NM ~7 NOTE..."
+~+ M 1 /
h
.~ ~ 1g 550. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2010034274 purports to have been executed
~~ 19
on December 21, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" DEC 21
20
2009".
21
22
23
Promissory Note and Mortgage on December 21, 2009 in direct violation of
24
25
27 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on December 28, 2009 as
28
- 111 -
Instrument No. 20093400401. (hereinafter "ADOT-20093400401") A copy

2 of the ADOT-20093400401 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL
3 Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit 89").
4
5
6
7
8
Relief Claims.
0
c.
a E (~
~.
.~ ~ 10 554. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20093400401 states "TOGETHER WITH
~o
a o~ THE NOTE..."
~~~ 11
0 a -~
L
U'T
6~
p~ 12
y O=
~.N 555. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20093400401 purports to have been executed
~, 13
on December 3, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" "3 day of
'E 14
~~ December 2009".
~_~W
T~
15
O^
4: =O
a ~~ 16
0
NM 556. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20093400401 purports to transfer the subject
a~.~ M ~~
y
►_ Promissory Note and Mortgage on December 3, 2009 in direct violation of

.~ 18
._ Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2005-62 Trust.
19
20
21
committed by Defendants MERS, BONY and CWALT were not limited to
22
the CWALT 2007-19, the CWALT 2005-56, the 2006-6CB and the CWALT
23
2005-62 Trusts.
24
26 committed by Defendants MERS, BONY and CWALT also took place in
27
the CWALT, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2006-39CB, Mortgage Pass-
28
- 112 -
1 Through Certificates, Series 2006-39CB (hereinafter "CWALT 2006-

2 39CB")
3
4 559. Plaintiffs re-allege all preceding paragraphs 52-71 and incorporate them
6 to RMEIC Trusts.
7
8
a, ~ beliefs, aver that the Prospectus for the CWALT 2006-39CB Trust was filed
8 9
C
with the SEC as Form 424B5. was filed under oath with the SEC and is
~R
E 10
aO O
'a 0
~~ available online at:
~ ~ 11
0 a -~
i
U'T https://www.sec.Gov/Archives/edgar/data/1269518/000095012406007291/v
o~
~L
12
,R
► ~.0 25493b5e424b5.txt Contained within this Prospectus and its related
z
—
o~ 13
documents the following information was declared about the investment
~~ ..
' E 14
o -@
~~ offering for sale to the public:
-~~w 15
as T~
Or
=o
0 ~~ 16
C.'
a) That the Issuer was Alternative Loan Trust 2006-39CB.
NM 7 ~7
h M 1/
,
. 18 b) That the Depositor was C WALT, Inc.
-~~ 19
21
d) That the Master Servicer was Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP.
22
23
24

26 based on REMIC Regulations.
27
28 g) That the Cut-off Date was November 1, 2006.
- 113 -
2 h) That the Closing Date was on or about November 30, 2006.
3
4
beliefs aver, that Defendant BONY, as Trustee for the CWALT 2006-39CB
5
Trust, is the sole gatekeeper for the protection of the Trusts and their
6
7
the best interests of the Trusts, adhere to all statutes and relevant laws
8
L
Qw ~ (~
pertaining to the pooling and servicing of those loans securitized into the
8
w Trusts for which they are Trustee.
.~ E lO
~o
a0 ~~ 11
C ~~
0 Qv
i U'T 562. As alleged herein, Plaintiffs aver that Defendant BONY wholly failed to
rte
+ p~ 12
C0 O L
., ~,0 discharge its duties and obligations, as Trustee for the CWALT 2006-39CB
13
~~ ..
' ~ 14
~ ~~
~E
-~~w 15
Instead, to protect its own business interests, BONY ignored pervasive and
T~
_ ~
or
_ ~ 16 systemic deficiencies in the underlying loan pools and the servicing of those
0
0 ~~
NM loans and unreasonably refused to take any action. In addition to causing
h M ~~
billions of dollars in damages to the Trusts for which Defendant BONY is

.~ 18
the Trustee for the CWALT 2006-39CB Trust, collateral damage and
A 19
prejudice to borrowers have occurred as a result of Defendant BONY's
20
abdication of responsibility.
21
22
23
purportedly to have been unlawfully transferred into the CWALT 2006-
24
39CB Trust.
25
26
27
recorded in the Johnston County, NC Recorder's Office on June 6, 2011 as
28
- 114 -

2 the ADOT-2011317924 was obtained from the Johnston County, NC
3 Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 90").
4
5
6
7
8
Relief Claims.
0
L
a
~ 9
~8
.
.~ E lO 566. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011317924 states "TOGETHER WITH THE
~o
a0 ~~ 11 NOTE(S)..."
C ~~
0 Qv
UT
hC~ o~
OL
12
~.0 567. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20113 17924 purports to have been executed
13
N
on May 12, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" May 12, 2008".
'E 14
'
~ E
.;,~
~W 15
_~
~. or
_~ 568. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20113 17924 purports to transfer the subject
a 16
0 ~~
~~
N ~y ~7 Promissory Note and Mortgage on May 12, 2008 in direct violation of
h ~~
j 1/
;
► Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2006-39CB Trust.
,
. 18
A 19
20
21
22
23
24
27
28
- 115 -

2 Relief Claims.
3
5 NOTE(S)..."
6
7
8
on September 19, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:"
0
a~, ~ 9 9.12.2012".
S ~.
w
.C
~
ap o
E lO
Q. 0
a ~
rn ~
m 11
0 Qv
U'T
00 12 Promissory Note and Mortgage on September 19, 2012 in direct violation of
y OL
R ~C
_~
_ ~ 13 Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2006-39CB Trust.
'E 14
~~ 574. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
-~
~w 15
T~
_~
~: or
_~ 16 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on May 1, 2012 as Instrument
0 ~~
w N M 7 ~7 No. 2012124561.(hereinafter "ADOT-2012124561") A copy of the ADOT-
h M 1/

.d
~ 18
A 19
20
21
22
23
Relief Claims.
24
25
26
NOTE(S)..."
27
~ ///
28
- 116 -
2 on April 30, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" APR 30 2012".
3
5 Promissory Note and Mortgage on April 30, 2012 in direct violation of
7
0
L
~" ~ 9 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on February 13, 2012 as
w ~~ Instrument No. 2012042463. (hereinafter "ADOT-2012042463") A copy of
'~ E 10
~R ap O
a OL
~ ~m 11 the ADOT-2012042463 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL
t`~. U >,̀
~0 Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 93")
gt 12
~v~ ~~
O y` 13
.~~" = i~
sa =E
o•~ 14
~ ~~
.~ ~w that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
~ ~T~ 15
~ _~ 16
y ~ 00
~ N~ Relief Claims.
y NM 17
J
.~ W 18
A 19
NOTE(S)..."
20
21
22
on February 9, 2012 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" 2-9-2012".
23
24
25
26
27
///
2s
-li~-
2 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on August 26, 2011 as Instrument
5 and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit 94").
6
7
8
0
a E 9 is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
3
.~
.C
~ E 10 Relief Claims.
~o
a o~
C ~~ 11
~~
0 Qv
UT
00 12
y
C3 oL
►~ _ ~
~C
NOTE(S)..."
0 13
=N
N ~
'E 14
°~ E 587. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011227097 purports to have been executed
-~~w 15
a~ Tr
o~
_~ 16 on August 24, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" 8/24/11"
0 ~~
iw NM
y
H M ~~
.~ 18
,_
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
///
27
///
2s
-iis-
4 Relief Claims.
5
6 591. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011220272 states "MORTGAGE..."

7
8
0
L
a
~ 9
on July 29, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" 29 day of July,
@8
.
C
.~ ~ 1~
2011".
ap o
a o~
c ~ ~
rn ~ 11
O Qv
UT
00 12
y OL
R
►~ ~C
~, 13
N
f6
' E 14 Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2006-39CB Trust.
~ ~~
°~ E
-~
;
~~W 15
as —n
o~
_ ~ 16 594. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
0 ~~
NM the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on June 13, 2011 as Instrument
~~r
y M 17
.~ 18
19
and is attached hereto (attached as "E~chibit 96").
20
21
22
23
24
Relief Claims.
25
26
27
NOTE(S)..."
28
- 119 -
1
3 on June 8, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:""06/06/2011".
4
g
a ~ 9
the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on June 8, 2010 as Instrument
~ 10
•
""'i (
gy
pL
a o~ No. 2010159698.(hereinafter "ADOT-2010159698") A copy of the ADOT-
11
U'T 2010159698 was obtained from the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office
w ~0
gr 12
R ~c
-~ 13
=N
f0
'
a oE 14
~ ~~ 600. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-2010159698 is void and not merely voidable and
.°~ -~
as T~~w
°° 15 that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
~ _~ 16
~
y ~~
N ~j
y~ N 17
y M
~ J
Relief Claims.
. ~ 18
,
A 19
601. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2010159698 states "MORTGAGE..."
20
22 on May 6, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" MAY 06 2010".
23
27
28
- 120 -
2 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on April 29, 2010 as Instrument
5 and is attached hereto (attached as "Eachibit 98").
6
7
8
0
L
Qr E 9 is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
8
.~
.~
C
~ 10
Relief Claims.
~o
a0 ~~ 11
C ~~
O Qv
UT
L
00 12
OL
C0 gc
►~ NOTE..."
o
s,~,y 13
_~
' ~ 14
~ ~~
'
° E
v
'~W
Tw is
_~
~: on
_~ 16 on March 31, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" MAR 31,
a
0 ~~
N~ 2010".
+
rte M 17
.
~ J p
6~ ~ 10
.~
A 19
Promissory Note and Mortgage on March 31, 2010 in direct violation of
20
21
22
23
the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on June 15, 2009 as Instrument
24
25
26
27
///
28
-121-
4 Relief Claims.
5
7 NOTE(S)..."
8
0
.
~ E
a 9 612. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2009156017 purports to have been executed
~.S
C
.~ ~ 10
on June 3, 2009 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" JUN 03 2009".
Op O
CO a
Qti
C ~~ 11
~~
0 Qv
U'T
00 12
0L
~R ~0c
. Promissory Note and Mortgage on June 3, 2009 in direct violation of
_ ~ 13
N
f6
'~ 14 Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2006-39CB Trust.
°~ E
~~w 15
;
P~ _~
or
_~ 614. Plaintiffs aver that an assignment of the Note and Mortgage, was recorded in
0 ~~ ~~ 16
NM ~7 the Pinellas County, FL Recorder's Office on March 6, 2008 as Instrument
h ~vj 1 /

,
. 18
-
, 19
20
21
22
23
24
Relief Claims.
25
26
27
NOTE(S)..."
28
- 122 -
3
on February 25, 2008 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" "FEB 25
4 ►• III~:~
6
7
~, g Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2006-39CB Trust.
0
~' ~ 9
'~ ~ o~ 10
'a o~ committed by Defendants MERS, BONY and CWALT were not limited to
11
U'T the CWALT 2007-19, the CWALT 2005-56, the 2006-6CB, the CWALT
wVj ~0
0L
12
/
~ ~N
2005-62, and the CWALT 2006-39CB Trusts.
a =~ 13
„y N
'
a E
o•@
~~ .. 14
~ ~~ 620. Plaintiffs aver that the pattern and practice of Securities and IRC violations
.°
~ -~~w 15
T~ ~ committed by Defendants MERS, BONY and CWALT also took place in
~ _~ 16
~
y ~~
N~
the CWALT, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2007-SCB, Mortgage Pass-
N 17
y
--
~
Through Certificates, Series 2007-SCB (hereinafter "CWALT 2007-SCB")
J
.~ ~ 18
A 19 621. Plaintiffs re-allege all preceding paragraphs 52-71 and incorporate them
21 to RMEIC Trusts.
22
24 beliefs, aver that the Prospectus for the CWALT 2007-SCB Trust was filed
26 available online at:
27 https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1269518/000114420407010851/v
28 067214 424b5.htm Contained within this Prospectus and its related
- 123-
1 documents the following information was declared about the investment

2 offering for sale to the public:
3
a) That the Issuer was Alternative Loan Trust 2007-SCB.
4
5
b) That the Depositor was CWALT, Inc.
6

8
0
L
a E 9 d) That the Master Servicer was Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP.
8
w .~
.a
R E lO
~o
a0 ~~ 11 e) That the Trustee was The Bank of New York.
C ~~
O Q~
U'T
00 12
0L
►,R _~.y ~ That the anticipated material federal income tax consequences were
_ ~ 13
' E 14
~~
a ~~
.~ -~~W 15
T~ g) That the Cut-off Date was February 1, 2007.
On
=o
C~
0 ~~ 16
NM
d
v 17 h) That the Closing Date was on or about February 27, 2007.
.~ ~ 1g
20 beliefs aver, that Defendant BONY, as Trustee for the CWALT 2007-SCB
26
27 624. As alleged herein, Plaintiffs aver that Defendant BONY wholly failed to
28 discharge its duties and obligations, as Trustee for the CWALT 2007-SCB
- 124 -
3 systemic deficiencies in the underlying loan pools and the servicing of those
4 loans and unreasonably refused to take any action. In addition to causing
5 billions of dollars in damages to the Trusts for which Defendant BONY is
6 the Trustee for the CWALT 2007-SCB Trust, collateral damage and
7 prejudice to borrowers have occurred as a result of Defendant BONY's
8 abdication of responsibility.
0
c.
~" ~ 9
~
'~ ~0 10 625. Plaintiffs aver the following assignments, in paragraphs 626-640 were
a ~~
11 purportedly to have been unlawfully transferred into the CWALT 2007-SCB
e V i,
su,'
°~ ~0 12 TrL1St.
y Ot
C
~ ~ O
13
,
~ =N
l0
' ~ 14
a o~
~ o,~
.°
~ ~W 15 the Lake County, FL Recorder's Office on February 12, 2010 as Instrument
~~~
or
~ _~ 16
y ~~
~ NM
M 17
2010014147 was obtained from the Lake County, FL Recorder's Office and
18
is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 101").
.~
A 19
20
21
22
Relief Claims.
23
24
25
NOTE..."
26
///
27
~ ///
28
- 125 -
2 on January 29, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" JAN 29,
3 2010".
4
6 Promissory Note and Mortgage on January 29, 2010 in direct violation of
7 Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2007-SCB Trust.
8
0
L
a
~ 9
~3.
wC recorded in the Johnston County, NC Recorder's Office on January 6, 2014
.~
~oE lO
'a o~ as Instrument No. 2014408150. (hereinafter "ADOT-2014408150") A copy
C ~~ 11
O Qv
i UT of the ADOT-2014408150 was obtained from the Johnston County, NC
go 12
oL
,
► ~. Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~chibit 102").
0 13
=N
f0
' ~ 14
~ ~~
°~ E
-~
;~W 15
~—~
~~ on
_~ 16 that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
0 ~~
NM is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
y M 1~
►
~ J p Relief Claims.
C~` ~ 10
.~
A 19
633. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2014408150 states "TO A CERTAIN DEED
20
OF TRUST..."
21
22
23
on December 24, 2013 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" DEC 24,
24
2013".
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
- 126 -
2 Promissory Note and Mortgage on December 24, 2013 in direct violation of
3 Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2007-SCB Trust.
4
5
6
recorded in the Deschutes County, OR Recorder's Office on April 26, 2011
7
as Instrument No. 2011-15506. (hereinafter "ADOT-2011-15506") A copy
8
of the ADOT-2011-15506 was obtained from the Deschutes County, OR
0
L
~" ~ 9
Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~ibit 103").
.~
~ E lO
a o~
•R (p L
637. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-2011-15506 is void and not merely voidable and that
11
U Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there is a
w ~0
gt 12
R ~~ very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
- ~ 13
=N
Relief Claims.
'
a ~
o -@ 14
~ °~ E
.~
~, ~w 15
T
~ ~
638. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011-15506 states "TO A CERTAIN DEED
~ _~ a 16
y ~~
~ N~ OF TRUST..."
N 17
v
.~ 18
AI 19
on Apri121, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" APR 21, 2011".
20
21
22
23
Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2007-SCB Trust.
24
26 committed by Defendants MERS, BONY and CWALT were not limited to
27
28
- 127 -
1 the CWALT 2007-19, the CWALT 2005-56, the 2006-6CB, the CWALT
2 2005-62, the CWALT 2006-39CB and the 2007-SCB Trusts.
3
5
6
the CWALT, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2007-8CB, Mortgage Pass-
7
Through Certificates, Series 2007-8CB (hereinafter"CWALT 2007-8CB")
8
a
L 643. Plaintiffs re-allege all preceding paragraphs 52-71 and incorporate them
~
8 9
g
~R
E 10
Op O
a0
~~ t0 RIVIEIC TI'UStS.
~ ~ 11
0 a~
UT
00 12
,R
. ~.
OL
_ ~N 13
y
N beliefs, aver that the Prospectus for the CWALT 2007-8CB Trust was filed
'E 14
°~ E with the SEC as Form 424B5. was filed under oath with the SEC and is
.-~
;,~
~W 15
available online at:
~, on
_~
a ~~ 16
0
NM
https://www.sec.Gov/Archives/edgar/data/1269518/000095012407001982/v
y ~ 17
/
~ J o
28776b5e424b5.txt Contained within this Prospectus and its related
.~
~: ~ ~O
documents the following information was declared about the investment
A 19
offering for sale to the public:
20
21
a) That the Issuer was Alternative Loan Trust 2007-8CB.
22
23 b)That the Depositor was CWALT,Inc.

24
26
d)That the Master Servicer was Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP.
27
28
- 128 -

3
4
g)That the Cut-off Date was March 1, 2007.
5
6
h)That the Closing Date was on or about March 29, 2007.
7
8
.
~
a ~ 9 beliefs aver, that Defendant BONY, as Trustee for the CWALT 2007-8CB
::, ~~
'~ ~ oE 10 Trust, is the sole gatekeeper for the protection of the Trusts and their
a ~~
o a -o
~ U'T
°~ ~0 12
y 0= the best interests of the Trusts, adhere to all statutes and relevant laws
R ~,O
~ -" 13
.~ =y pertaining to the pooling and servicing of those loans securitized into the
' ~ 14
a o ~~ Trusts for which they are Trustee.
~ ~' E
.~~ -~~W IS
i~ ~~~
~ _~ 16
o ~~ 646. As alleged herein, Plaintiffs aver that Defendant BONY wholly failed to
~ NM
v 17
discharge its duties and obligations, as Trustee for the CWALT 2007-8CB
J p
,
.~ W
~ 1O
A 19 Instead, to protect its own business interests, BONY ignored pervasive and
20
systemic deficiencies in the underlying loan pools and the servicing of those
21
loans and unreasonably refused to take any action. In addition to causing
22
billions of dollars in damages to the Trusts for which Defendant BONY is
23
the Trustee for the CWALT 2007-8CB Trust, collateral damage and
24
prejudice to borrowers have occurred as a result of Defendant BONY's
25
abdication ofresponsibility.
26
///
27
///
2s
- 129 -
1 647. Plaintiffs aver the following assignments, in paragraphs 648-657 were

2 purportedly to have been unlawfully transferred into the CWALT 2007-8CB
3 Trust.
4
5
6
the Lake County, FL Recorder's Office on October 27, 2010 as Instrument
7
8
ADOT-20100108140 was obtained from the Lake County, FL Recorder's
0
a~, ~ 9
Office and is attached hereto (attached as "Exhibit 104").
8 ~.
w
0
~R aD O
~ 10
a0 ~~ 649. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-20100108140 is void and not merely voidable and
c ~
rn ~ 11
0 Qv
UT that Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there
o~
~L
12
~,0 is a very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
_ ~ 13
Relief Claims.
'E 14
~~
~w
T~
15
_~
or
_~ 650. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20100108140 states "TO A CERTAIN DEED
0 ~~ ~~ 16
NM OF TRUST..."
M 17
.~ 18
A 19
on May 27, 2010 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" MAY 27, 2010".
20
21
22
23
24
26 recorded in the Deschutes County, OR Recorder's Office on June 2, 2011 as
27 Instrument No. 2011-20111. (hereinafter "ADOT-2011-20111") A copy of
28
- 130 -
1 the ADOT-201 1-201 1 1was obtained from the Deschutes County, OR

2 Recorder's Office and is attached hereto (attached as "E~chibit 105")
3
4
654. Plaintiffs assert ADOT-2011-20111 is void and not merely voidable and that
5
Defendants has engaged in tax evasion or avoidance and therefore there is a
6
very true and real CONTROVERSY supporting Plaintiffs' Declaratory
7
Relief Claims.
8
0
L
E 9 655. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011-20111 states "TOGETHER WITH THE
8
@.
.C
~ ~ 10 NOTE OR NOTES..."
~o
'a 0
~~
a ~
rn ~ 11
0 Q~
UT 656. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011-20111 purports to have been executed
~ .00 12
o~
~,N on May 31, 2011 as evidenced by it stating it was "Dated:" MAY 31, 2011".
_ ~ 13
' ~ 14
~ ~~
°~ E 657. Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-2011-20111 purports to transfer the subject
.;,~
~W 15
_~
o~
_~ Promissory Note and Mortgage on May 31, 2011 in direct violation of
a 16
0 ~~
NM Securities law and the IRC governing the CWALT 2007-SCB Trust.
y 17
`
~ J p
w
H 10
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

A 19
FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 1:
20
TO DETERMINE STATUS OF
21
DEFENDANTS' CLAIMS [28 U.S.C. §§ 2201, 2202]
22
(against all Defendants, and Associates in Fact)
23
24
658. Plaintiffs re-allege all preceding paragraphs 1-657 and incorporate them by
25
reference as if fully set forth herein.
26
///
27
///
28
- 131 -
1 659. § 2201(a) of Title 28 of the United States Code states: "[i]n a case of actual
2 controversy within its jurisdiction...any court of the United States, upon the
3 filing of an appropriate pleading, may declare the rights and other legal
4 relations of any interested party seeking such declaration, whether or not
5 further relief is or could be sought. Any such declaration shall have the force
6 and effect of a final judgment or decree and shall be reviewable as such."
7
8
660. § 2202 of Title 28 of the United States Code states: "[further necessary or
0
a ~ 9
proper relief based on a declaratory judgment or decree may be granted,
~.
C
~ 1~
after reasonable notice and hearing, against any adverse party whose rights
~R Op O
~~
a
~~ have been determined by such judgment."
-~ 11
Q"T
0U
+~i 00 12
CO Ot
~~ ~, 661. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant BONY does not have a secured or unsecured
_ ~ 13
N
legal, equitable, or pecuniary interest in the Plaintiffs' loan evidenced by the
' E 14
o -~
'
° E
-~
fact that the only lien assigned by Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. was a
~W 15
a~ _ ~ T~
on
=o non-existent mortgage and purported assignments thereafter by Defendants
a 16
0 ~~
NM ~7 are void and have no value since the Deed of Trust was never transferred
y ~vj ~ /
and is wholly unsecured.

,
. 18
-
, 19
662. On December 23, 2010, Defendants claimed they were assigned and
20
transferred a secured enforceable interest in, and a perfected lien against the
21
Plaintiffs' Note, Deed of Trust and property.
22
23 663. Thus, the competing allegations made by Plaintiffs and Defendants, above,
24
establish that a real and actual controversy exists as to the respective rights
25 ofthe parties to this matter, including ownership of the property.
26
27 664. In addition, the harm by Defendants is ongoing and includes the potential of
28 Plaintiffs' home, being at risk of a statutorily defective foreclosure.
- 132 -
1 Therefore, as this claim relates to future harm, Plaintiffs' declaratory relief

2 claim is cognizable as an independent cause of action.
3
4 665. Accordingly, Plaintiffs request that the Court make a finding and issue an
5
appropriate order stating that none of the named Defendants or Doe
6
Defendants, have any right or interest in Plaintiffs' Note, Deed of Trust, or
7
the property which authorizes them, in fact or as a matter of law, to collect
~, g Plaintiffs' mortgage payments or enforce the terms of the Note or Deed of

0
~' ~ 9
Trust in any manner whatsoever.
5
~R
E 10
a0 O
a o~ 666. Plaintiffs will suffer prejudice if the Court does not determine the rights and
11
UT obligations of the parties because: (1) Plaintiffs will be denied the
~0
gt 12
~~ opportunity to identify their true and current creditor/lender and negotiate
o ;, 13
_~ with them;(2) they will be denied the right to conduct discovery and have
'
a o
E 14
o ~,~ Defendants' claims verified by a custodian of records who has personal
•-~ ~ w 15
T~ ~
knowledge of the loan and all transactions related to it; and (3) they will be
~ _~ 16
o ~~
~ NM ^7 denied the opportunity to discover the true amount still owing minus any.
y ~ ~ /
J illegal costs, fees and charges.

;
.~, ~ 18
A 19
667. Due to the actual case and controversy regarding competing claims and
20
allegations, it is necessary that the Court declare the actual rights and
21
obligations of the parties and make a determination as to whether
22
Defendants' claims against Plaintiffs are enforceable and whether they are
23
secured or unsecured by any right, title or interest in Plaintiffs' property.
24
25 668. Furthermore, the conduct of Defendants and/or one or more of the Doe
26 Defendants, and each of them, as herein described, was so malicious and
27 contemptible that it would be looked down upon and despised by ordinary
28
- 133-
1 people. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to punitive damages in an amount

2 appropriate to punish Defendants and to deter others from engaging in
3 similar conduct.
4
5 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

6 DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 2 "DOES THE LOAN BEING IN
7 DEFAULT AT THE TIME OF THE ASSIGNMENT(S), IDENTIFIED
8 IN ATTACHED EXHIBITS 2-105 CONFLICT WITH
0
L
a ~ 9 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G?"
.@
.~ E lO
~o (against all Defendants, and Associates in Fact)
a0 ~~
C ~
rn ~ 11
0 Qv
U'T
yy 00 12
~L
R gc
►
~ 5,N
o ~, 13 reference as if fully set forth herein.
=y
N ~
= E 14
~~ ~~
-;~ 15
~~w 670. For their second and distinct cause of action Plaintiffs are informed and
-~
or
_~ 16 believe, and based on such information and beliefs aver, that genuine
0 ~~
L NM ~7
h M ~/
controversies exists as to whether or not the loans, we in default at the time
►
~ J
~ 18 of the ADOT(s) that were recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s).
,
.
R
A 19
21 beliefs aver, that if the court finds that the ADOT(s) that were recorded in
22 local County Recorder's Offices) are not "VOID" that the Defendants have
23 violated the tax status of the REMIC statute set forth in the IRC.
24
26 beliefs aver, that this Court is the proper authority to interpret public policy,
27 as SEC and IRC statutes, and to grant Declaratory Relief in the form of a
28 Court Order determining whether or not the Plaintiffs' loan was in default at
- 134 -
1 the time the ADOT(s) that were recorded in local County Recorder's
2 Offices) were executed.
3
4 ~ ~ 673. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
5 beliefs aver, that taxation on prohibited transactions are governed by 26

6 U.S.C. § 860F(a)(1) which states:
7
8 "There is hereby imposed for each taxable year of a REMIC a tax equal to
0
L
a E 9 100 percent of the net income derived from prohibited transactions.
.~8
C
~R 0p O
~ 10
~~\
Qw
~~ 11 674. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
0 a~
U T
L
00 12
~L
beliefs aver, that if this Court determines that the ADOT(s) that were
R ~c
_ ~ 13 recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), are valid conveyances, it is a

'~ 14 contribution of loan(s), which was in default and therefore a prohibited
~ ~~
-~
~~W 15 transaction as governed by 26 U.S.C. § 860F(a)(1) and as such created a
as;_~
or
_~
16 taxable event equal to 100 percent of the amount of the loans.
0
y
~~
L NM
h 17
.~ ~ 1~
19 beliefs aver, that none of the Defendants have reported or paid the
20 mandatory imposed tax equal to 100 percent of the amount of the Plaintiffs'
21 loan as a result of the conveyance purported by the ADOT(s) that were
22 recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), and as such Plaintiffs are
23 bringing this information forward and are entitled to monies from the IRS
24 for identifying the contribution of Plaintiffs' loan as well as other loans that
25 were contributed to the CWALT Trusts that were prohibited transactions.
26
27 676. Wherefore, Plaintiffs request that this court declare that the Plaintiffs' loan
28 was in default, at time of the ADOT(s) that were recorded in local County
- 135 -
1 Recorder's Office(s), and was consequently a prohibited transaction and is

2 therefore VOID. Or as the alternative, demonstrate that contribution of
3 Plaintiffs' loan as well as the loans identified by Plaintiffs that were
4 transferred to the CWALT Trusts were not void by ordering Defendants to
5 produce the Opinion Letter authorizing the ADOT(s) that were recorded in
6 local County Recorder's Offices) are true and valid transactions and as such
7 created a taxable events equal to 100 percent of the amount of the loans
8 identified by Plaintiffs that were contributed to the CWALT 2007-19 Trust
~ 9 involving prohibited transactions pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 860F(a)(1) and to
~8
.
~ 10 require Defendants to provide the tax returns that identified the taxable
~o
(p L
O
m ~~, 11
~ events) and that a tax equal to 100 percent of the amount of the loans
a~
UT
00 12 identified by Plaintiffs was paid.
OL
~c
_ ~N 13
'~ 14 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

~ ~~
;-~
~~W 15 DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 3 "DID THE VALUE OF
_~
or
~;. _~
~
a ~~ 16 PROPERTIES, AT THE TIME OF THE ASSIGNMENT, COMPLY WITH
0
y
L NM
h 17 THE "80% VALUE-TO-LOAN RATIO" OF 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G?

►
~ J
~ 18 (against Defendants BONY, CWALT, and Associates in Fact)
A 19
20 677. Plaintiffs re-allege all preceding paragraphs 1-676 and incorporate them by
21 reference as if fully set forth herein.
22
23 ~ 678. For their third and distinct cause of action Plaintiffs are informed and
24 believe, and based on such information and beliefs aver, that genuine
25 controversies exist as to whether or not the value of the properties, at the
26 time of the ADOT(s) that were recorded in local County Recorder's
27 Office(s), complied with the Value-To-Loan ratio requirement of 26 U.S.C.

28 §§ 860A-860G.
- 136 -
4 as SEC and IRC statutes, and Declaratory Relief in the form of a Court
5 Order as to whether or not the value of the properties was worth more or less
6 at the time the ADOT(s) that were recorded in local County Recorder's
7 Office(s), were executed than it was at the time the loan was originated.
8
Accordingly, Plaintiffs aver that it did not comply with the Value-To-Loan
0
a E 9 ratio requirement of 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G.
8
.~
.~
C
~oE 10
a0
~~ 680. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
c ~~ 11
0 ¢v
UT beliefs aver, that the Value-To-Loan ratio requirement of 26 U.S.C. §§
p0 12
h OL
C~
,
► ~.0 860A-860G mandates the Value-To-Loan of a property to be transferred into
_ ~ 13
a REMIC trust must be that of 80% Value-To-Loan ratio or higher.
' E 14
~~
-~~w
; ~ 15
as on 681. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
_~
0 ~~ 16
c
beliefs aver, that because the value of properties declined so dramatically
N~
M 17
after the loan origination that it cannot possibly comply with the 80% Value-
.~ 18
To-Loan ratio or higher, and is therefore a prohibited transaction.
~_ 19
21
beliefs aver, that taxation on prohibited transactions are governed by 26
22
U.S.C. § 860F(a)(1) which states:
23
25 100 percent of the net income derived from prohibited transactions."
26
27
28
- 137 -
1 recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), is a valid conveyance, it is a

2 contribution of the loans, which was less than the Value-To-Loan ratio
3 requirement of 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G and therefore a prohibited
4 transaction as governed by 26 U.S.C. § 860F(a)(1) and as such created a
5 taxable event equal to 100 percent ofthe amount ofthe loans.
6
8 beliefs aver, that none of the Defendants have reported or paid the
0
a $ 9 mandatory imposed tax equal to 100 percent of the amount of the Plaintiffs'
wC ~~
1~ loan as a result of the conveyance purported by the ADOT(s) that were
~~ Op O
a O~
0 recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), and as such Plaintiffs are
rn 11
i Uv
~o
gr 12 bringing this information forward and are entitled to monies from the IRS
R gc
5,y
13 for identifying the contribution of Plaintiffs' loan as well as other loans that
a =~;
>E were contributed to the CWALT Trusts involving prohibited transactions
a o @•
14
~ °~ E
.~
o -~
~'w
15 pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 860F(a)(1).
~' T~
0~ =O
16
y ~W
~ N (•j
N
17
685. Wherefore, Plaintiffs request that this court declare that the Plaintiffs' loan
y v
J
W 18
was less than the Value-To-Loan ratio requirement, at time of the ADOT(s)
,
.
A 19
that were recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), were consequently
20
prohibited transactions and are therefore VOID. Or as the alternative,
21
demonstrate that contribution of Plaintiffs' loan as well as the loans
22
identified by Plaintiffs that were transferred to the CWALT Trusts were not
23
void by ordering Defendants to produce the Opinion Letter authorizing the
24
ADOT(s) that were recorded in local County Recorder's Offices) are true
25
and valid transactions and as such created a taxable event equal to 100
26
percent of the amount of the loans identified by Plaintiffs that were
27
contributed to the CWALT Trusts involving prohibited transactions pursuant
28
to 26 U.S.C. § 860F(a)(1) and to require Defendants to provide the tax
- 138 -
1 returns that identified the taxable events) and that a tax equal to 100 percent
2 ofthe amount of the loans identified by Plaintiffs was paid.
3
4 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

5 DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 4"DO THE ASSIGNMENTS
6 IDENTIFIED IN ATTACHED EXHIBITS 2-105 COMPLY WITH
7 THE "TIMING REQUIREMENT" OF 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G?"
g (against Defendants BONY,CWALT,and Associates in Fact)
0
L
~" $ 9
y ~
5
~ ~ oE 10
'
a o~
11 reference as if fully set forth herein.
U'T
+°+ ~°gt
0 12
~~
13 687. For their fourth and distinct cause of action Plaintiffs are informed and
a =N
'
a o ~ 14
believe, and based on such information and beliefs aver, that a genuine
~ °~ E
.~ -~~W 1 S controversy exists as to whether or not the ADOT(s) that were recorded in
T~ ~
~ _~ 16 local County Recorder's Offices) comply with the "Timing Requirement"
y ~~
~ N~
y ~ of26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G.

J
.~ ~ 18
A 19
20
beliefs aver, that this Court is the proper authority to interpret public policy,
21
as SEC and IRC statutes, and Declaratory Relief in the form of a Court
22
Order as to whether or not the Plaintiffs' loan complies with the "Timing
23
Requirement" of 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G at the time the ADOT(s) that
24
were recorded in local County Recorder's Offices) were executed.
25
~ 689. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
26
beliefs aver, that taxation on contributions after startup are governed by 26
27
U.S.C. §§ 860G(d)(1) which states:
28
- 139 -
1 "Except as provided in paragraph (2), if any amount is contributed to a

REMIC after the startup day, there is hereby imposed a tax for the taxable
2
year ofthe REMIC in which the contribution is received equal to 100
3
percent ofthe amount of such contribution."
4
6 beliefs aver, that if this Court determines that the ADOT(s) that were
7 recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), are valid conveyances, it is a
8 contribution of loans to the Trusts after the startup as governed by 26 U.S.C.
9 §§ 860G(d)(1) and as such created a taxable event equal to 100 percent of
~.
10 the amount ofthe loans.
0
o~ ~, 1 1
~
a -~
U'T
o
pL° 12 691. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
C
_ y
o ~, 13 beliefs aver, that none of the Defendants have reported or paid the
_~
>E
14 mandatory imposed tax equal to 100 percent of the amount of the Plaintiffs'
~~
-~w
~ 15
.;,~ loan as a result of the conveyance purported by the ADOT(s) that were
_~
or
_~ 16
0 ~~ recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), and as such Plaintiffs are
NM
N
M 1 / bringing this information forward and are entitled to monies from the IRS
J
/
.
W 18 for identifying the contribution of the loans as well as other loans
.~
A 19 contributed to the CWALT Trusts after the startup day.
20
21 692. Wherefore, Plaintiffs request that this court declare that the ADOT(s) that
22 were recorded in local County Recorder's Offices) do not comply with the
23 "Timing Requirement" of 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G and is therefore VOID.
24 Or as the alternative, demonstrate that contribution of loans as well as the

25 loans identified by Plaintiffs that were transferred to the REMIC Trusts were
26 not void by ordering Defendants to produce the Opinion Letter authorizing
27 the ADOT(s) that were recorded in local County Recorder's Offices) are
28 true and valid transactions and as such created a taxable event equal to 100
- 140 -
1 percent of the amount of the loans identified by Plaintiffs that were

2 contributed to the C WALT Trusts after the startup day as governed by 26
3 U.S.C. §§ 860G(d)(1) and to require Defendants to provide the tax returns
4 that identified the taxable events) and that a tax equal to 100 percent of the
5 amount of the loans, identified by Plaintiffs, was paid.
6
7 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

8 DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 5"DO THE ASSIGNMENTS
0
L
a ~ 9 IDENTIFIED IN ATTACHED EXHIBITS 2-105 CONVEY
C 8
~.
.~ ~ 10
~o
"QUALIFIED LOANS" as defined by 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G?"
a0~~
~ ~ 11
Q~ (against Defendants BONY,CWALT,and Associates in Fact)
0 U'T
00 12
o=
~,N
_ ~ 13 693. Plaintiffs re-allege all preceding paragraphs 1-692 and incorporate them by
'~ 14 reference as if fully set forth herein.
~~
~E
-~
~~W 15
;
=n
o~
=o
a ~~ 16 694. For their fifth and distinct cause of action Plaintiffs are informed and
0
y
iw NM
M 17 believe, and based on such information and beliefs aver, that genuine
.
~ J
c~: ~ 18 controversies exists as to whether or not the ADOT(s)that were recorded in
'2
A 19 local County Recorder's Offices) complies with the "Qualified Loan
20 Requirement" of26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G.
21
22
23
24
25 Order as to whether or not the Plaintiffs' loan complies with the "Qualified
26
Loan Requirement" of 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G at the time the ADOT(s)
27
that were recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), were executed.
28
- 141 -
4
100 percent of the net income derived from prohibited transactions.
6
7
8
a E 9
8
~. recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), is a valid conveyance, it is a
wC
.~
~oE 10 contribution of Plaintiffs' loan, which was a violation the "Qualified Loan
a0~~ 11
C ~~
0UQ'o
T Requirement" of 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G and therefore a prohibited
o
~L
~ 12
R
~.0 transactions as governed by 26 U.S.C. § 860F(a)(1) and as such created a
_ ~ 13
N
f0 taxable event equal to 100 percent of the amount ofthe loans.
' E 14
~~ ~~~
-~
~~w 15
; 698. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
on
_~
0 ~~ 16 beliefs aver, that none of the Defendants have reported or paid the
NM
+~+ 17
mandatory imposed tax equal to 100 percent of the amount of the Plaintiffs'
. ~ 1g
, loan as a result of the conveyance purported by the ADOT(s) that were
A 19
recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), and as such Plaintiffs are
20
bringing this information forward and are entitled to monies from the IRS
21
for identifying the contribution of Plaintiffs' loan as well as other loans that
22
were contributed to the CWALT Trusts that were prohibited transactions.
23
24 699. Wherefore, Plaintiffs request that this court declare that the Plaintiffs' loan
25 was a violation of the "Qualified Loan" requirement, at time of the ADOT(s)
26 that were recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), and were
27 consequently a prohibited transaction and is therefore VOID. Or as the
28 alternative, demonstrate that contribution of loans identified by Plaintiffs
- 142 -
1 that were transferred to the CWALT Trusts were not void by ordering
2 Defendants to produce the Opinion Letter authorizing the ADOT(s) that
3 were recorded in local County Recorder's Offices) are true and valid
4 transactions and as such created a taxable event equal to 100 percent of the
5 amount of the loans identified by Plaintiffs that were contributed to the
6 CWALT Trusts involving prohibited transactions as governed by 26 U.S.C.
7 § 860F(a)(1) and to require Defendants to provide the tax returns that
8 identified the taxable events) and that a tax equal to 100 percent of the
0
.
~
a E 9 amount of the loans identified by Plaintiffs was paid.
~, .~
.~
C
~oE 10
a0 ~~ 11
c ~~ SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
0 Qv
i U'~
00 12 DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 6"ARE THE ASSIGNMENTS
R o~
~c
0
13 IDENTIFIED IN ATTACHED EXHIBITS 2-105 "DEFECTIVE
'E 14 OBLIGATIONS" PURSUANT TO 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G?"
~ ~~
~~w 15
;
—r
(against Defendants BONY,CWALT,and Associates in Fact)
: on
~ ; =o
~.
0
y
~~ 16
Nj
~.
17
/
-~ J
.~ ~ 18
A 19
20
701. For their sixth and distinct cause of action Plaintiffs are informed and
22
controversies exist as to whether or not the ADOT(s) that were recorded in
23
local County Recorder's Offices) transfer "Defective Obligations" pursuant
24
to 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G.
25
26
27
28
- 143 -
1 Order as to whether or not the ADOT(s)that were recorded in local County

2 Recorder's Offices) transfer "Defective Obligations" pursuant to 26 U.S.C.
3 §§ 860A-860G.
4
~ 9 "There is hereby imposed for each taxable year of a REMIC a tax

~.
equal to 100 percent of the net income derived from prohibited
~oE lO
(p L
o~ transactions."
~ ~ 11
Q -~
U'T
p0 IZ
OL
~C
_~ 704. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
_ ~ 13
' ~ 14
~ ~~
°~ E
-~
recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), are valid conveyances, it is a
~~W 15
;
on
_~ contribution of loans, which transfers "Defective Obligations" pursuant to
a ~~ 16
0
NM 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G and therefore a prohibited transactions as
M 17
governed by 26 U.S.C. § 860F(a)(1) and as such created a taxable event
,
. 18
equal to 100 percent ofthe amount of the loans.
Ai 19
20
21
beliefs aver, that none of the Defendants have reported or paid the
22
23
loan as a result of the conveyance purported by the ADOT(s) that were
24
recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), and as such Plaintiffs are
25
bringing this information forward and are entitled monies from the IRS for
26
identifying the contribution of Plaintiffs' loan as well as other loans that
27
were contributed to the CWALT Trusts that were prohibited transactions.
28
- 144 -
2
706. Wherefore, Plaintiffs request that this court declare that the contribution of
3
Plaintiffs' loan, transfers a "Defective Obligation", at time of the ADOT(s)
4
that were recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), and was
5
consequently a prohibited transaction and is therefore VOID. Or as the
6
alternative, demonstrate that contribution of Plaintiffs' loan as well as the
7
loans identified by Plaintiffs that were transferred to the CWALT Trusts
8
were not void by ordering Defendants to produce the Opinion Letter
0
L
~' ~ 9
authorizing the ADOT(s) that were recorded in local County Recorder's
~~ Offices) are true and valid transaction and as such created a taxable event
° ~o
'~ ~ 10
'
° ~U
11 equal to 100 percent of the amount of the loans identified by Plaintiffs that
m V i.
to.' were contributed to the CWALT Trusts involving prohibited transactions as
«: ~0 12
S=
~~
N
y o ;, 13
governed by 26 U.S.C. § 860F(a)(1) and to require Defendants to provide
_~
'- ~ 14
the tax returns that identified the taxable events) and that a tax equal to 100
a o
~ °~ E
.°~ ~W 15 percent of the amount of the loans, identified by Plaintiffs, were paid.
as T~
o~
0
~ _~ 16
y ~W
~
y
NM
~
~7
~ /
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
;
J
DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 7"DO THE ASSIGNMENTS
.~, ~ 18
A 19
IDENTIFIED IN ATTACHED EXHIBITS 2-105 VIOLATE THE
20
"BANKRUPTCY REMOTE" REQUIREMENT PURSUANT TO 26 U.S.C.
21 §§ 860A-860G?"
22 (against Defendants BONY,CWALT,and Associates in Fact)
23
24
25
26
708. For their seventh and distinct cause of action Plaintiffs are informed and
27
believe, and based on such information and beliefs aver, that genuine
28
- 145-
1 controversies exist as to whether or not the ADOT(s) that were recorded in

2 local County Recorder's Offices) violate the "Bankruptcy Remote"
3 requirements pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G.
4
5
6
7 as SEC and IRC statutes, and Declaratory Relief in the form of a Court
8 Order as to whether or not the ADOT(s) that were recorded in local County
0
a ~ 9
Recorder's Offices) violate the "Bankruptcy Remote" requirements
.~
.~
C pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G.
~oE lO
a o~
C ~~
rn ~ 11
0 Qv
UT 710. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
y
00 12
Ot
R
►~ ~. beliefs aver, that26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G requires that assets being
~, 13
transferred into a REMIC trust must be "Bankruptcy Remote" and that
'E 14
°~ E Bankruptcy Remoteness is obtained by having two separate "True Sale"
~W 15
as ~_T^
o~
_~ 16 transactions separating the Loan Originator from the REMIC trust. One of
0 ~~
NM the parties required to participate in the two separate "True Sale"
+
rte M ~~
h
transactions is identified as the "Depositor".

.~ 18
A 19
20
beliefs aver, that none of the parties identified in the ADOT(s) that were
21
recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), were the "Depositor" for the
22
CWALT Trusts and therefore prohibited transactions.
23
26
U.S.C. § 860F(a)(1) which states:
27
28
- 146 -
2 100 percent of the net income derived from prohibited transactions.
3
5
6
recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), is a valid conveyance, it is a
7
contribution of loans, which was a violation the "Bankruptcy Remote"
8
requirements pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G and therefore a
0
a~, E 9 prohibited transaction as governed by 26 U.S.C. § 860F(a)(1) and as such
.~
w created a taxable event equal to 100 percent of the amount ofthe loans.
~R a0 O
E lO
~~,
OG
C ~ ~ 11
0 Qv
i U'T 714. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based on such information and
o~ 12
oL
~.0 beliefs aver, that none of the Defendants have reported or paid the
13
' E 14
~~
°~ E
~W 15
loan as a result of the conveyance purported by ADOT(s)that were recorded
as ;
~
on
_~ 16 in local County Recorder's Office(s), and as such Plaintiffs are bringing this
0 ~~
~~
d
NM
17
information forward and are entitled monies from the IRS for identifying the
18
contribution of Plaintiffs' loan as well as other loans contributed to the
,
.
_~ 19
CWALT Trusts that were prohibited transactions.
20
715. Wherefore, Plaintiffs request that this court declare that the contribution of
21
Plaintiffs' loan was a violation of the "Bankruptcy Remote" requirements
22
pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G, at time of the ADOT(s) that were
23
recorded in local County Recorder's Office(s), were consequently prohibited
24
transactions and are therefore VOID. Or as the alternative, demonstrate that
25
contribution of Plaintiffs' loan as well as the loans identified by Plaintiffs
26
that were transferred to the CWALT Trusts were not void by ordering
27
Defendants to produce the Opinion Letter authorizing the ADOT(s) that
28
- 147 -
1 were recorded in local County Recorder's Offices) are true and valid
2 transactions and as such created a taxable event equal to 100 percent of the
3 amount of the loans identified by Plaintiffs that were contributed to the
4 CWALT Trust involving prohibited transactions pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §
5 860F(a)(1) and to require Defendants to provide the tax returns that
6 identified the taxable events) and that a tax equal to 100 percent of the
7 amount of the loans identified by Plaintiffs was paid.
8
0
a ~ 9 EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
wC ~.
.~ ~ 10 DECLARATORY RELIEF COUNT - 8"DO THE DELIVERY AND/OR
~o
a o~
a ~
rn ~
o, 11 TRANSFERS OF THE NOTES IDENTIFIED IN ATTACHED
0 Qv
U'T
y
0
0L
0 12 EXHIBITS 2-105 YEARS AFTER THE TRUSTS' CLOSING DATES
Rgc
~ S.$
~
o ~, 13 RENDER THE REMIC STATUS OF THE TRUSTS VOID
_~
~~
~'- E 14 PURSUANT TO 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G?"
~~
-;
~~
~w 15 (against Defendants BONY,CWALT,and Associates in Fact)
-~
or
_~ 16
a ~~
0
Fw NM
+~i v 17 716. Plaintiffs re-allege all preceding paragraphs 1-715 and incorporate them by
/
-~ J
.~ ~ 18 reference as if fully set forth herein.

A 19
20 717. For their eighth and distinct cause of action Plaintiffs are informed and
22 controversies exist as to whether or not the delivery and/or transfer of the
23 Notes years after the Trusts' closing dates render the REMIC status of the
24 Trusts void pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G.
25
26
28
- 148-
1 Order as to whether or not the ADOT, recorded in the Los Angeles County
2 Recorder's Office on December 23, 2010 as Instrument No. 20101905145
3 constitutes delivery and/or transfer of the Plaintiffs' Note years after the
4 Trust's closing date rendering the REMIC status of the Trust void pursuant
5 to 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G.
6
7
719. Wherefore, Plaintiffs request that this court declare that the ADOT(s) that
8
were recorded in local County Recorder's Offices)render the REMIC status
0
L
E 9 of the Trusts void pursuant to 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G. Or as the
8
~~ alternative, demonstrate that contribution of Plaintiffs' loan as well as the
C
~ 10
~R Op O
O
m ~ 11
~
loans identified by Plaintiffs that were transferred to the CWALT Trusts
0 a -~
U'T
L
go 12
were not void by ordering Defendants to produce the Opinion Letter
oL
~~ ~,N authorizing the ADOT(s) that were recorded in local County Recorder's
o ~, 13
=N
N
' ~ 14
Offices) are true and valid transactions and as such Plaintiffs are bringing
~ ~~
°~ E
-~
~W 15
this information forward and are entitled monies from the SEC for
;
~
as =~
o~
_~ identifying the contribution of Plaintiffs' loan as well as other loans
a ~~ 16
0
~. N M
y
contributed to the CWALT Trusts that were in direct conflict with
y
y 17
18
documents filed with the SEC.
.~
~_ 19
20
beliefs aver, that in Puccetti v. Girola, 20 Cal. 2d 574, 577 [128 P.2d 13], the
21
court also cites code section 1095 of the Civil Code and states that, as it
22
pertains to the ADOT(s) that were recorded in local County Recorder's
23
Offices) in California, a failure to follow the mandate of the section renders
24
a deed void. (See also the following early cases which laid down the same
25
rule from the beginning of the Supreme Court reports: Fisher v. Salmon, 1
26
Cal. 413 [54 Am.Dec. 297]; Echols v. Cheney, 28 Cal. 157; Morrison v.
27
Bowman, supra, 29 Cal. 337, 352.)
28
- 149 -
3 beliefs aver, that as it pertains to the ADOT(s) that were recorded in local
4 County Recorder's Offices) in California, the general rule is thus
5
enunciated in 15 California Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Deeds, section
6
71, page 470: "The manner of execution of a deed by an attorney in fact for
7
the grantor is prescribed by statute. He must subscribe the name of his
g principal to the instrument, and then his own as attorney in fact. If the
0
°~ ~ 9
instrument is not executed in this manner, it does not operate as a
~~ conveyance by the principal, though it may be sufficient as a memorandum
° E 10
~R ap O
C~ O L
c ~~ 11
of an agreement to convey the property described."
a -~
i V >+
.
°+ ~°gt
~ 12
R gc
5,N 13
a =N CONCLUSION
'
a o ~•E 14
~ °' E
.,~
~ ~W 15
as T~ ~ Plaintiffs have stated in plain simple English that there are controversies
~ _~ a 16
y ~N
i.i N M
regarding the validity of the ADOT(s) that were recorded in local County
y N 1 '~
h v
J
Recorder's Office(s), purportedly transferring beneficial interest under the
.~ ~ 18
Deeds of Trust and Mortgages. And that if the ADOTs is a valid transaction
A 19
that it would be a prohibited transaction proving that the Defendants have
20
committed both Tax and Securities Fraud for which Plaintiffs would not
21
only be entitled to receive monies for bringing the violations to the attention
22
of the IRS and SEC, but also would be adversely effected by the millions of
23
dollars of fines and penalties assessed the Defendants as Plaintiffs are
24
stockholder in the Defendants and their parent companies.
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
- 150 -
1 PRAYER FOR RELIEF

2 WHEREFORE,Plaintiff demands judgment as follows:
3 a)For general and special damages according to proof at trial, but not less
4 than $5,000,000.00 against Defendants;
5 b) For statutory penalties for each separate statutory violation where
6 allowed by statute;
7 c)For punitive damages against Defendants according to proof at trial and
8 using the applicable punitive damages standards from the involved
0
L C
QI G
9 statutes;
a 10 d)For restitution;
~ ~t
~ ~~
11 e)For injunctive relief enjoining Defendants, their agents or employees,
'
~ V i.
y L
~G from pursuing any claims against Plaintiffs' property;
13 f) For a declaratory judgment as to Plaintiffs' Declaratory Relief Counts 1-
~ =N
~= ~ ..
E
~
a o ~~ 14 105;
o rn
a~ ~
.^
o W
15
~a ~T~ g)For attorney's fees where authorized by statute or law;
~ on
=o
v 16 h)For costs of suit;
°
o
~ N~
~
N
~''
17 )
i For such other relief as the court deemsjust and proper.
J
w 18
...
A
A 19
Dated this 24~' day of September, 2018
20
21
f car..-~/ ~~v rl
_.
22
DANIEL MASTERSON I P LIPS MASTERSON
23 2151 HOLLY RIDGE DRIVE 2151 HOLLY RIDGE DRIVE
HQLLYWOOD,CA 90068 HOLLYWOOD,CA 90068
24 PlaintiffPro Se PlaintiffPro Se
25
26
27
28
aS _ _ _ten
~
, This page is pa~4 0#your document - DO NAT DISCARD Q
~r
~f~~l1 I I~!~~1~l ~Il~VI I I I~~~~~!IE~l l

RecordadlFlled In OBiclal Records Fee: 81.00
Recorders Office, Los Angeles County,
CalHomla Tax: 0.00
aher: 0.00
05!30107 AT 08:OOAM rota: e~.oa
Title Company
Yl'TLE(S)
L E A D S H E E T
Assessor's Identification Plumber (Alid)

To be completed by Examiner OR Title Company In black ink. (dumber of AIRf's Shown
Q E„~„, THIS FORM IS NOT TO BE DUPLICATED

'~ '
' - - - s — - -~~
i
EQUITY T{'TL.E
Rxording Requested By:

C. CLERMONT
06130101
~1~19fAllIII~YN~Alllnlllp~~ll~lllq~l~llll
After Recording Return To:
COUN?RYWIDL HOME LOANS, INC.
zoo7~29~~~s
MS SV-79 DOCUMENT PROCESSING
P.O.Box 10423
Van Nuys, CA 91910-0923
Pr~eparod By:
JOSEPH HOWE
(5paee Abore 7Lb Ilne For Reeor~dL~g Dafe) l~

Bv02233PJ U0016719183905007
f Eacrov/Cloying it IDoc ID f]
DEED OF TRUST
M[N 1000157-0008067395--3
DEFWIT10NS
Words u~d in rnuluple 4acdons of phis document are defined below and other words are dcGned in Sections 3,
1 1, 13, 18, 20 and 21. Certain rules regarding the usage of words used in this document arc also provided in
Section !6.
(A) "security Instrument" meanR this document, which is datod M~+Y ~6, 2007 ,together
with ell Riders to this document.
B)"Borrower" is
DANIEL MASTERSON, A SINGLE MAN AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 50$ INTEREST, AND BIJOU
PHILLIPS, A SINGLE WOMAN AS TO AN UNDIVIDED 50$ INTERES?, AS TENANTS IN
COI~SON
CAUFORMA•Single Faintly-Fannle Maa/F~eddie ~Aac UNIFORM INSTRUMENT YVITH MERS
2 398 1 1 8 T 1 9 1 B 34 0 0000 1 008 A

.~
DOC ID $: 00016719183905007
Borrower's address is
6227 HOLLYMONT DRIVE, 10S ANGELES, CA 90068 ,
Bornower is the trustor under this Security Instrument.
(C1 "Lender" is
COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC.
Lender is a CORPORATION
organized and existing under the laws of NEw YORtc
Lendefs addroas is
9500 Park Granada MSNII SVB-319, Calabasas, CA 91302-1613
(D)"TruBtee" iS
RECONTRUST COMPANY, N.A.
225 W HILLCREST DRIVE, MSN: TO-02, THOOSAND OAKS, CA 91360 ,
(I~ "HERS" i~ Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. MFRS is a separate corporation that i~ meting
solely as a nominee for Lender and Lender'R successors and aR.signs. MFRS is the beneficiary under Wia
Security [ms~rument. HERS is organ9zed and existing under the laws of Delaware, end has an addrrss and
telephone numbrr ofP.O. Boz 2026, Flint, MI 48501-2026, ul.(8B8)679-HERS.
(F') "Note" means the promissory note signed by Borrower and dated r~Y 16, 2007 ,The
Note states that Borrower owes Lender
ONE MII,IION NINE HUNDRED NINETY FIVE THOUSAND and 00/100
Dollars(U.S. S 1,995,000.00 )plus intet~est. Borrower has promised to pay 1l~is debt in regular
Periodic Payments and to pey the dobt in fu1! cwt later than JUNE O1, 2037
(G)"P~aperly" mcanR the property that is described below un~r the heading "'Frmufer of Rights in the
«U~r~ l
(f~ "Loan" means the debt eviderrcxd by the Note. plus intcres~ any prepayment charges end lase charges
due under the Note, and all sums due under this Socurity Ins~rumen~, plug intereist.
(n "Riders" means all Riders to this Security Inswment shat are executed by Borrower. The following
Riden~ are to be executod by Bornower[check boa as applicable):
Adjustable Rate Rider Condominium Rider ~Second Home Rider

Balloon Rider ~Planned Unit Development Rider 1-4 Family Rider
VA Rider Q Biweekly Payment Rider ~ Other(s)[specify]
(J) "Applicable Law" means all controlling applicable federal, state and Iocal statutes, regulations,
ordinances and administrative rules and orders Ghat have the effect of law) a9 well as all applicable Final,
non-appealable judicial opinions.
(K)"Community Association Dues, Fees, and Aasessmenls" means all dues, fees, assessments and other
charges that a~ imposed on Borrower or the Property by e condominium ar>sociation, hom~wners association
or similar organization.
(L)"Electrode Ftiods TYansfeP' means any transfer of funds, other char s u~ansecdon originated by chxk,
draft, or vmilar paper insWrnent, which is initiated through en elecvonic terminal, telephonic inswment,
computer, or magnetic tape so es to order, inswct, a authorize a financial institution ~o debit or crodit an
account, Such term includes, but is not I~mited to, point-oF-sale ~ranAfers, automated teller machine
transactions, transferx initiated by ulephone, wire trensferr~, end autornetod clearinghouse transfers.
V (11~ "Escrow Items" means those iumr that area described in Section 3.
(N)"Mi~cellaoeous Proceeds" means any compensation, ~cttlement, award of damages. w proceeds paid by
N any third parry (other than ~n4urance proceeds paid under the coverages described in Section 5)for: C)damage
N to, or destzuction of, the Roperty;(ii) condemnation or otfur taking of all or any part oC the Property: (iii)
~8A(CA)t~~ CML(08IOS) Pape 201 ~e ~ Form SODS 1101
00
Q1
nOC tD ~: 00016719183905007
conveyance in lieu of condenmauon; or (iv) miareprescncatiorus of, or omixsions as to, the value and/or
condition of the Property.
(0)"Mortgage Ir~ut~nce" means insurancx protecting Lender egainat the nonpaymem of, or defaul[ on, the
Loan.
(P)"Periodk Payment" means the regularly scheduled amount due for (i) principal and interest under the
Note, plug (ii) any amounts under Section 3 of this Security Instrument.
(Q)"RESPA" means the Rtai Eslete Settlement Procedures Act(12 U,S.C. Section 2601 et seq.) and its
implementing regulation. Regulation X (?A C.F.R. Part 3500), as they might be amended from time [o time,or
any additional or successor legislation or regulation that governs the same subject matter. As uRed in this
Security Inswment, "RFSPA" refers to all requircmenLs and rewtrictiona that arc imp~ed ie rtigard to a
"federally related mortgage loan" even if the Loan does not yuali[y ae e "federally relet~d mortgage loan"
under RESPA.
(R)"Successor in Interest of Borrower" means any party that has taken title to the Property, whether or not
that party has e~umed Borrowers obligations under the Note and/or this Security Inswmen~
TRANSFER OF RIGHTS II~ TNB PROPERTY

71►e beneficiary of this Security Inswment is MFRS (solely as nominee far Lender and Lenders
successors end assigns) and the successors and assigns of MERS. ThiA Security Inawment
secu~+ea to Lender. (i) the repayment of the LAan, and all renewals, extensions and modifications
of the Note; and (ii) the performance of Borrowers covenants and agr+ee~nts under this
Security lnswment and the Notc. For this purpose, Borrower irrevocably grants and conveys to
Trustee, in wst, with power of sak, the following described property located in the
COUiVTY OT LOS ANGELES
(Type of Raading Jurisdiction] ~Nu~of Reeordio~ Jwndictiool
LO? 22, ?RACY 4166, IN THB CITY OF LOS ANGELES, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 96 PAGE 54 OF MAPS, IN
THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY
Pe~+cel ID Number. 5586-017-027 which currcnUy has tt~ eddre.~ of

2251 HOLLYRIDGE DR, LOS ANGELES
[SumUCityl
Califomie 90068-3514 ("Property Addre~"):
t~P ~1
TOGE17~i WTl`H afI U,e improvemenus now or hereahcr erected on the property. and aU eaFemen~s,
appurtenances, and fixtures now or hereafter a part of the property. All replflcemcnL9 and additions shall also
be covered by this Security Inswmen~ All of the foregoing is rtfemd to in this Security Instivment at the
"Property." Borrower understands and agrees that MFRS holds only legal title to the intereRts granted by
Borrower in this Security instrument, but, if na~tasary W comply with law or custom, I RS (ats nominee for
F~+ Lender and I..ende~s succe~.~rs and a~igns) hag the tight: to exercise any or all of those in~ere.~~s. including,
N
ti ~~BA(CA~ (Q2D7y CML (08/04) Pie 3 of to Form SOS 1101

DOC ID is 00016719183905007
but not limited to, the right to foreclose and se11 the Property; and to take any action roquired of Lender
including. but not limited to, releasing and canceling this Socurity Insuumen~
BORROWER COVENANTS that Borrower is lawfully seisod of ehe agtsle hereby conveyed and has the
right to grant end convey the Property and that the Property is unencumbered, txcept for encumbrances of
record. Borrower warrent~ and will defend generally the title to the Property against all claims and demands.
subjoct to any encumbrances of record.
TKIS SEC'ZJRI7'Y INSTRUMENT combines uniform covenants for national use end non-uniform
covenant4 with limited variations by jurisdiction to cons[i[ute a uniform sxuricy instrument covering ties)
O~P~nY•
UI~TIFORM COVENANTS.Borrower and Lender covenant and agree as follows:

1.Payment of Principal, Interest, Escrnw Items, Prepayment Charges, and Late Charges. Borrower
shall pay when due the pdocipal of, and interest on, the debt evidenced by the Nou and any prepayment
charges and late charges due under the Note. Borrower shell also pay funds for Escrow Items pursasnt to
Section 3. Payments due under the Note and this Security Instrument shelf be made in U.S. currency.
However, if any check or other instrument receiver) by Lender as payment under the Note or this Security
Instrument ie retum~d to [.ender unpaid, Lender may roqu'ue chat any or all sub~soquent payments due under
the Nou and this Security Instn:ment be made in ore or more of the following forms, erg selxted by I.errder:
(a) cash;(b) money order;(c) certified check. bank chxk. treasurer's check or cashier's shack, provided any
such check is drawn upon an institution whose deposits ere inRured by a Federal agency, insvumentality, or
entity; or(d)Electronic Funds Transfer.
Payments ere deemed received by Leruter when roCeived at the location designaud in the Notc or et such
other location as may bt designated by Lender in accordance with the notice provisions in Section 15. Lender
may c+eturn eery payment or partial payment if the payment or partial payments are insufficient to being the
Loan currectt. Lender may accept arty payment or partial payment insufficient to bring the Loan curnent,
without weivtr of any righ~5 hereunder or prejudice to its rights to refuse such paymcnl or partial peymait~ in
the future, but Lander is not obligated to appty such payments at the time such payments are accepted. If each
Peaodic Payment is applied as of its scheduled due date. then I.cnder need not pay incer~t on unapptied
fundv. Lender may hold such unappliod funds until Borrower makes payment to bring the Loan current If
Borrower dce,4 rot do so within a reasonable period of time. Lender sha[1 either apply such funds or return
than to Borrower. If not applied earlier, such funds will be applied to the outstanding principal balance under
the Note immediately prior to forccl~ure. No offset or claim which Borrower might have now or in the future
against Lender shall relieve Borrower from making paymenus dus under the Note and this Security lnswmenc
or performing the covenants and agreemenu~ secured by this Security Instrument.
2.Application of I'aymeale or Proceeds. Excxpt a5 otherwise described in thin Section 2, all payments
accepted and applied by Lender shall be applied in the following order of priority: (a) interest due under the
Note; {b) principal due under the Nou;(c) amounts due under Section 3. Such payments sha11 be applied to
each Periodic Payment in the order in which it became due. Any remaining amount4 shall be appliod first to
late chergev, second to any ocher amounts due under this Sxurity 1nRerument, and then to reduce the principal
balance of the Note.
If Lender receivers a payrnerit from Borrower for a delinquent Periodic Payment which includes a
suFfcient amount to pay any late charge due, the payment may be applied to the delinquent payment and the
late charge. If more than one Feriodic Payment is ouutanding. Lender may apply any payment received from
Borrower to the repayment of the Periodic Payments if, and to the extent that. each payment can be paid in
fuU. To the extent that any excess exists after the payment is applied to the full payment of one or more
V Periodic Payments, sash excess may be applied to any late charges due. Voluntary prepayments shall be
applied Oust to any prepayment charges and then es described 9n the Note.
H+ Any application of paymentr+. insurance proceeds, or MiscellaneouA ProceedF to principal due under the
N Note shall not extend or postpone the due date. or change the arraun~ of the Periodic Payments.
~~en(~A► coxorr cH~ ~oaos~ P~ a ~r,e Form coos troy
00
Q1
DOC ID #: 00016719183905007
3 .Funds[or Escrow Reins. Borrowtr shall pay to Lcnder on the day Periodic Paymcnts anc duc under
the Nptc, until the Note is paid in full, a sum (the "Funds") to provide for payment of amounts due for. (a)
taxes and a~seasments and other items which can attain priority over this Security lnswment as a lien or
encumbrance on the Property;(b) leasehold paymcnu~ or ground ner►te on the Property, if eny; (c) prcaniumis
for any and ell insurance acquired by Lender under Section 5; and (d) Mortgage Insurance premiums. if any, or
any earns payable by Borrower to I.endcr in lieu of the payment of Mongage Insurance pr$miums in
accordance with the provimons of Section 10. ThCSC lLEfiB 8f6 C811Cd "Escrow Items." At origination or at any
time during the term of the ~.oan, Lender may require that Community Association Dies, Fees, and
A~,sassments, if any be escrowed by Borrower. end such dues, fear and assessments shall be an Escrow Tum.
Borrower shall promptly famish to Lender all notices of amounts to be paid under this Section. Borrower ~ha11
pay Lender the Funds for Escrow Itarnv emless Lender waives Borrowers obligation to pay the Funds for any
or all Escrow Items. Lender may waive Borrower's obligation to pay to Lender Fundrs for any or all Escrow
I[ems at any time. Any such waiver may only be in writing. In the event of such waiver. Borrower sha11 pay
din;c~y, when and where payable, the amounts due for any Escrow lterns for which paymtnt of Panda hav
been waived by Lcndcr end. if Lender requires, shall furnish to Lender rc.CeipLs evidencing such payment
within isuch time period as Lender may neyuire. Borrower's obligation to make such paymtnts and to provide
roceipts shall for all purposes be doemed to be a covenant and agi+eement contained 'm this Sxurity
Insuurnent, ac the phrase "covenant aid agreement" is used in Section 9. If Borrower is obligated ~o pay
Escrow items dire~Uy, pursuant to a waiver, and $orrower fails to pay the amount due for en Escrow Item,
Lender may eacercise i~c rights under Section 9 end pay such arnount and Bompwer shall then be obligatal
under Section 9 to repay to Lender any such amount. Lender may revoke the waiver as to any or all Escrow
Items at any time by a notice given in accordance with Sxtion 15 and, upon such revocation, Borrower shall
pay to Ler~der sIi Fund, and in such amounts, that ere then required wader this Suction 3.
Lender may, at say time, collect and hold Funds in an amount (a) sufficient to permit Lender to apply the
Fantle at the time spoci6ed ueder RESPA, and (b) not to exceed the maximum amount a lender can require
andu RESPA. Lender shall estimate the amount of Funds due on the ba4~ of current data and reasonable
estimates of expenditures of future Escrow Items or otherwise in accordance with Applicable Law.
The Funds shall beheld in an institution whose deposi[~ are insured by a federal agency. inswmcrilality,
or entity (including Lender, if Lender is an institution whose deposi4c are so insare~) or in any Federal Home
Loan Bank. Leader shall apply the Funds to pay the Escrow Item4 no lattr than the time specified under
RESPA. Lender shell not charge Borrower for holding and applying the Funds. annually analyzing the escrow
account or verifying the Escrow Items, unless Lender pays Borrowor interest on the Funds and Applicable
I.Bw permits Lender to make such a charge. Unless an agreement is made in writing or Applicable Law
requires intereat to be paid on the Funds, Lender shal} not be required to pay Borrower any interest or earrings
on the Funds. Borrower and L,endcr can ag~ze in writing, however, chat interest shall be paid on lho Funds.
I..endet shall give to Borrower, without charge, as annual acrnundng of the Fundx as requir~cd by RESPA.
If there is a xurplus of Funds held in escrow, as defined under RESPA, Lender shell account to Borrower
for ttie excess fundq in accordance with RESPA. If there ~s e shortage of Funds held in eRcrow, as defined
under RESPA, Lender shall notify Borrower as rewired by RESPA, and Borrowu shall pay to Lcndcr the
amount necessary to make up the shortage in accordance with RESPA, but in no more than 12 monthly
payments. ]f there is a deficiency of Fund4 held in escrow, ag deCned under RESPA, Lender shall notify
Borrower as requiroQ by RESPA, and Borrower r,~all pay to Lender the amount necessary to make up the
deficiency in accordance with RESPA, but in no ~ than 12 monthly payments,
Upon payment in fui! of all sums s~curod by this Security Inswment, Lender shall promptly refund to
Borrower any Funds held by Loader.
E-+
N
t~
y
-eA(CAJ (o2o7f CHL (081Ds) Paq~e s m ~s Form sous trot
OQ
d1
DOC ID ~; 00016719183405007
4.Cbar~es; Liens. Borrower shall pay ali saxes, a~e~,gcnent~, chmgcs,fines. and impositions attributable
W the Property which can aUain priority over this Security InKtrument, leasehold payments or ground r+ent~ on
the Property, if any,and Community A.~,sociadon Dues,Peas, and Amts,if any. To the extent thaz those
itemA are Escrow Items,Borrower shall pay them in tha manner providod in Section 3.
Bocrvwer shall promptly discharge any lien which has priority over this Security lrnsuumcnt untesx
Borrower:(a)agrees in writing to the payment of the obligation secured by the iiai in a manner acceptable w
LendCr, but only so long as Borrower is performing such agreement;(b) contests the lien in good faith by,or
defends against enforcement of the lien in, legal proceedings which in Lendefs opinion operate to rmevea~ the
enforcement of the lien while those proceedingA a~ pending, but only until such prooeedinga arc concluded;
or (c) secures from the holder of the lien an agroement isatisf~ctory to Lender subordinating the fien to this
Security [nswment. If Lender determines that any pan of the Property is subject to a lien which can again
priority over thiF Security InsWment, Lender may give Borrower e notice identifying the lien. Within l0 dayA
of the date an which shat notice is given, Borrower shall saGssfy the lien or take one or mort of the actions set
forth above in this Section 4.
Lender may roquire Borrower to pay a cne-time charge fa a reel estate face verification and/or reporting
service used by Larder in connection with this Loan.
5.Property I~uraoce. Harrower shall keep the improvements now existing or hereafter crated on the
Property insured against loss by fn, hazards included within the twm "eatende~ coverage," and any other
hazards including, but oot limited to, earthquakes and Goods, for which Lender requires insurance. This
insurance shalt be maintained in the amouri~s (including deductible levels) and for the periods that Lender
requin~. What l ender requires punRuant to the preceding sentences can change during the term of the Loan.
The insurance carrier providing the insurance shall be ch~en by Borrower subject to Lender's right to
disapprove Bornnwer's choice, which right shall not be exercised unreasonably. Lender may require Borrower
to pay, in connection with 1liis Loan, either.(a)a one-time charge for flood zone dttemtination. cutification
and tracking services; or (b) a one-time charge for t]ood zone determination and certification servieac and
subsequent charges each dme mappings or similar changes occur which reasonably might affect such
del~rtnination ar ccrti6cation. Borrower Rhal1 also be responsible for the payment of any foes imposed by the
Aederal Emergency Management Agency in cormection with the eieview of any flood zoo determinetiori
resulting from an objection by Bosmwer.
If Borrower fails to maintain any of the coverages described above. Lender may obtain insurance
coverage, at Lender's option and Borrower's expenFe. Lender is under no obligedon to purchase any particular
type or amount of coverage. Therefore, rn~ch coverage shall cover Lender, but might or might not protect
Borrower, Borrower's equity in the Property, or the contents of ehe PlapeRy, against any risk hazard or
liability end might provide greater or lesser coverage then wss previously in effect. Borrower acknowledges
that the cwt of the insurance coverage so obtained might significantly exceed the cost of insurance ghat
Borrower could have obtained. Any amount4 disbursed by Lender under this Section 5 shall become additional
debt of Borrowu secur~cd by this Security Inswment. These arna~n~.s shall bear interest ei the No~c rate from
the date of disbursement and shell be payable. with such incerrRt, upon notice from Lendu to Borrower
requesting payment.
A11 inswance policies required by Lender and renewals of such policies shall be subject W Lender's right
to disapprove such policies. shall include a standard r~ngage clause, and shall name Lender as mortgagee
and/or as an additional kacs payee and aarower further agrees to generally assign rights to insurance proceeds
to the holder of the Note up to the amount of the ou6s~ending loan balance. L.cnder shall have she right to hold
Q the policies and ronewal certificates. If Lender requires, Borrower sha11 promptly give to I.endcr all r~ceip~s of
F+
N
t4
'
~ ~~sn~cn~ toao>> cr+~ ~oe~cs~ Paps 8 or 18 Form toes trot
O~
DOC ID 9: 00016719183405007
paid premiums and renewal notices. jf Borrower obtains any form of insurance coverage, not otherwi.4e
requirod by Under, for damage to, or destruction of, the Property, such policy shall include a standard
mortgage clause and shail name I..ender av mortgagce and/or as an additio~l loss payee and Borrower further
agmes to generally assign rightx to insurance proceeds to the holder of the Note up to the amount o! the
outstanding loan balance.
jn the event of loss, Borrower shall give prompt notice to the insurnna carrier and Lender. Lender may
make proof of loss if not made pmmpdy by Borrower. Unless Lender end Borrower otherwise agree in
writing. any insurance procced~, whether or not the underlying insurance was required by Lender, shall be
applied to rcRtosacion or repair of the Property, if the restoration or repair is economically feaRiblC and
Lenders security is not IasRcned. During such repair and restoration period, Lender shall have the right to hold
such insurance proceeds until Lender has had an opportunity to inspect such Property to ensure the work has
bcen completed to Lender's satisfaction, provided that Ruch inspection shat] be undertaken promptly. Lender
may disburse proceeds for the repairs and restoration in a jingle payment or in a series of progress paymenu
es the work is compleud. Unless en agrcement is made in writing or Applicable Law requires interest to bo
paid on such insurance proceeds, Lender shall not be required to pay Borrower any intertst or earnings on
such pivcoeds, Fees for public adjusterR, or other third parties, retained by Borrower shall not be paid out of
the insurance proceeds and shall be the solo obligation of Borrower. If the restoration or repair is nol
ernnomically fusible or I.tnde~e security would be lessened, the insurance proceeds shall be applied to tt~
sums secured by this Security InsWment, whether or not then due, with the excess if any. paid io Borrower.
Such insurance proceeds shall be applied in the order provided for in Section 2.
If Borrowu abandons the Property, Lender may file, negotiate and settle any available insurance claim
and related martens. If Borrower does not respond within 30 days to a nonce from Lender that the in.Rurance
carrier has offered to settle a claim, then Landed may negotiate and settle the claim. The 30-day period wi11
begin when the notice is given, in either even, or if Lender acquires the Property under Soclion 22 or
otherwise, Borrower hereby assigns to Lender (a) Borrower's rights to any insurance proceeds in an amount
not to exceed the amaunGg unpaid under the Note or this Sauriry Instrument, and (b) arty other of Borrower's
righGg (other than the right to arty refund of unearned premiums paid by Borrower) under e11 insurance policies
covering the Property, insofar ag such rights nre applicable to the coverage of the Property. Lender may use
the insurance proceeds either to repair or restore she Property or to pay amounts unpaid under the Notc or this
Security InsWmen~ whether or not then due.
6.Qccupancy. Borrower shall occupy, a4cablish, end use the Property ag Borrowers principal residence
within 60 days after the execution of this Security Instrument and shall continue ~o occupy the PrapeRy ac
Borrower's principal residence for at Iees~ one year after the date of occupancy, unless Lender otherwise
agrees in writing, which consent sha11 not be unreasonably withheld, or unless extenuating circumstances exist
which are beyond Bomower'A control.
7. Preservation, Maintenance and Protection of the Property; lnspeclio~ss. Borrower shall not
destroy, damage or impair the Property, allow the Property to deteriorau or commie waste on the Property.
Whether or not Borrower is residing in the Property, Borrowu shall maintain the Property in order to prevent
the Property from deterioeating or decreasing in value due to its condition. Unless it is deuxmined pursuant to
Section 5 that repair or reRt~ration is not economically feasible, Borrows shall promptly repair the Property if
darnagtd to avoid further deterioration or damage. If insurance or oondemnatiori proceeds are paid in
connection with damage to. or the taking of, the Property, Borrower shall be responsible for oepairing or
re~swring the Property only if Lender has re[ea~ed proceeds for such purposes. Lender may disburse proceeds
p for the repairs and restoration in a single payment or in a series of prognss payments as she work is
,~ cvmpleced. If the inAurance or condemnation procoed~ aria not ~raflicierit to repair or siestore the Property,
Borrower is not relieved of Borrowers obligation for the completioo~ of such repair or restoration.
H
N
~ ~~ntcn)coso>> cH~ ~oeros~ ago ~ a +e Fern,3oos trot
G4
01
DOC ID is 0001671918390500
Lender or its agent may make reasonable enlace upcm and inspoctions of the Pmperty. If it hay
reasonable cause. L.endcr may inspect the interior of the improvements on the Property. Larder shall givc
Sornnwer notice at the timc of ar prior co such an interior inspection specifying such reasonably cause.
8. Somower's Loan Application. Borrower shall be in default if, during the Loan application process,
Borrower or any persons or enGtiea acting et the direction of Borrower or with Borrowa's knowledge or
consent gave materially false, misleading, or inaccurate information or x~atemen~s to Lender (or failed to
provide Lender with material information) in connection with the Loan. Material representations includo, but
are not limned to, representations concerning Bornower's occupancy of the Property a4 Bonowc~'s principal
r+ctsidencc.
9.Protection of Lender's Interest in the Property end Rights Under this Security lnstrumeot. If (a)
Borrowtr fails W perform the covenants and agreemtn~s contained in lhiA Security inswmeo4 (b) there is e
legal proceeding ghat might significantly affect L,ende~s interest in the Property and/or righ4s under this
Secariry Instrument (such as a proceeding in bankruptcy, probate, for condemnation or forfeiture, for
enforcement of a lien which may attain priority over this Security InAtrument or to enterer laws or
regulations), or (c) Borrower has abandoned the Property. then Lender may do and pay for whatever is
reasonable or appropriate to protect Lcsider's interast in the Properly and rights under ~Itis Security Instrument,
including protecting and/or assessing the value of the Property, and securing and/or repairing the Property.
Lenders actions can include. but er+e not limited to: (a) paying any sums socwed by a lien which hag priority
over ~hiR Security lnswment; @) appearing in court; and (c) paying reaxonable attorneys' fees to protect its
interest in the Property and/or righl.4 under this Security Instrument, including its secured position in a
banlwptcy pr+occediag. Securing the Property includas. but is not limited to, entering the Property to make
repairn, change Ioc~~, replace or board up doors anti windows, drain water from pipes. eliminate building or
other cak violations or dangerous conditions, end have utilities wmed on or off. Although Lender may take
action under this Section 9, Lender does not have to do so and is not under any duty or obligation to do so. It
is agrCed that Lender it~urs no liability fof not taking any or all actions aulhoriud under ~hi~ Section 9.
Any amoums disbursed by Lender antler this Section 9 shall become additional debt of Borrower secured
by this Security lnxwment. These amounts shall bear interest at the Note rate from the date of disburFemenl
and shall be payable, with such interest, upon notice from Leader ~o Borrower requesting payment.
If this Security Instramen! is on a leasehold Borrower sha11 comply with all the provisions of the tease.
if Borrower acquires fee title to the Properly, the leasehold and the fee title shall not merge unless Lender
egr~es to the merger;n writing.
10. Mortgage Insurance. If Lender required Mortgage Insurance as a condition of making the Loan,
Borrower shall pay the premiums required to maintain the Mortgage Insurance in eftect. lf, for any reason, she
Mortgage Insurance coverage required by Lender cxa.4es W be available from the mortgage insurer that
previously provided such insurance and Borrower way required to make separately degigr,ated payments
toward the premiums for Mortgage Insurance, Borrower shalt pay the premiums required to obtain covacage
substandslly equivalent to the MoRgage Insurance previously in effect, al a cost substantially equivalent to the
cost w Bonvwer of the Mortgage Insurance previously in effect, from an alternate mortgage insurer selected
by Lender. If substantially equivalent Mortgage Insurance coverage is not available, Borrower xhall continue
~o pay to Lender the amount of the separately designated payments that were due when the insurance coverage
ceased to be in effect. [.ender will accept, use and retain these payments as anon-refundable leas reserve in
lieu of Mortgage Insurance, Such lass mserve shall be non-refundable, notwithR~anding the fact that the I..oan
is ultimately paid in full and Lender shall not be required to pay Borrower any interest or earnings on such
logs reserve. [.ender can no longer require loss reserve payments if Mortgage Insurance coverage (in the
amount and for the period that Lander requires) provided by an insurer selected by Leader again becomes
~►1 available, is obtained, and Lender requir+~s iseparately dasignaud payments ~owaN the premiums Cor Mortgage
Insurance. If Lender required Mortgage Insurance as a condition of making the Loan and Borrower was
N roquire~ to make separately designated pay~nty toward Itie premiums for Morcgagc Insurance, Borrower
N
ID
~.en~cna ~oao~~ c~~ ~osros~ P,~. s a ,B corm sees iron
00

Masterson v. CWALT Et Al

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Masterson v. CWALT Et Al

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 2:18-cv-08929-DDP-PLA Document 1 Filed 10/16/18 Page 1 of 164 Page ID #:1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-

6 a) ALLEGATIONS PERTAINING TO ASSIGNMENT REFERENCED

y ~ 17 PURSUANT TO 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G?"..........................................................- 143 -

1 NOW COME Plaintiffs Daniel Masterson and Bijou Phillips, (Plaintiffs) by

5 Trust 2007-19, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-19; The

27 1 see Masterson v. Bank of New York Mellon 2:14-cv-08741-DDP-AJW (ECF No. 1)

'E 14 jeopardy as a result of Defendants' actions giving Plaintiffs and irrefutable

y M 1~ was recorded containing information that is known to be false, or that should

1 II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

27 [as amended through P.L. 112-106, approved April 5, 2012].

1 II III. THE PARTIES

C ~ ~ 11 CWALT, Inc. (hereinafter "CWALT") was the Depositor of the CWALT,

'E 14 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-56; the CWALT, Inc.,

h M 17 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-62; the CWALT, Inc.,

~ 10 Alternative Loan Trust 2006-39CB, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,

22 Series 2007-8CB; is a Delaware corporation whose registered agent is

28 private electronic database that tracks the transfer of ownership interests in

h M 1 / based in New York, New York with corporate headquarters located at 1

23 Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-6CB, (hereinafter "2006-6CB

24 Trust") is based in New York, New York with corporate headquarters

25 located at 1 Wall St., New York, New York 10286.

24 Trust") is based in New York, New York with corporate headquarters

25 located at 1 Wall St., New York, New York 10286.

4 time permitted. However, Plaintiffs allege on information and belief, that

' o @~E 14 individually and jointly with the other Defendants.

25 alleged in this Complaint. Additionally, some or all of the Defendants acted

27 the scope of their agency if acting as an agent of the other.

1 IV. NATURE AND SUMMARY OF THE ACTION

5 home allows people to provide a college education for their children,

6 supports them in retirement, and provides financial support during difficult

26 In an attempt to appear to be in compliance with the Non-Judicial

27 Foreclosure Scheme adopted by California, Defendants recorded, or caused

28 to be recorded, a "Corporate Assignment of Deed of Trust" in the Los

1 Angeles County Recorder's Office on December 23, 2010 as Instrument No.

4 19, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-19.

6 25. The aforementioned assignment, although part of the Plaintiffs' claims, is

8 gravamen of the instant complaint is Plaintiffs have identified over 100(one

1 V. GENERAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

3 a) ALLEGATIONS PERTAINING TO ASSIGNMENT REFERENCED

1 37. Plaintiffs aver that Defendant MERS executed ADOT-20101905145,

3 Home Loans, Inc. to Defendant BONY as Trustee for 2007-19 Trust as

5 MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS,INC.

6 T.Sevillano, Assistant SecretaYy

1 42 Plaintiffs aver that the ADOT-20101905145 is void on its face, as the

5 Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.

6 By: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.,

7 Its Attorney In Fact

in the land records.

8 ~ 57 Plaintiffs' initial investigation has confirmed that the Defendants were

in contravention of the trust, except as authorized by this article and by any

a ~~ 16 investments' objectives, strategies, risks, performance, distribution policy,

a z° 13 g) That 26 U.S.C. §§ 860A-860G requires an asset that is to be

3 investment offering for sale to the public:

5 a) That the Issuer was Alternative Loan Trust 2007-19.

20 CWALT 2007-19 formation; management; and tax considerations pursuant

24 Prospectus for the CWALT 2007-19.

27 beliefs, aver that the CWALT 2007-19 Trust Prospectus is disclosure

28 document and that although it is not a contract, barring amendment or

1 alteration, strict compliance the CWALT 2007-19 Trust Prospectus is

1 purchased by a REMIC Trust to be "Bankruptcy Remote" via two "True

2 Sale" transactions in between the loan originator and the Trust.