LINDA LYNAUGH V. MICHAEL VINCENT, No. 20-15363 (9th Cir. 2021)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED MAR 19 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT LINDA LYNAUGH, No. Plaintiff-Appellant, v. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 20-15363 D.C. No. 2:19-cv-04643-DJH MEMORANDUM* MICHAEL VINCENT; STINSON LEONARD STREET LLP, Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Diane J. Humetewa, District Judge, Presiding Submitted March 16, 2021** Before: GRABER, R. NELSON, and HUNSAKER, Circuit Judges. Linda Lynaugh appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her action alleging Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. Kwan v. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). SanMedica Int’l, 854 F.3d 1088, 1093 (9th Cir. 2017). We affirm. The district court properly dismissed Lynaugh’s action because Lynaugh failed to allege facts sufficient to show a qualifying debt under the FDCPA. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (to avoid dismissal, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); Turner v. Cook, 362 F.3d 1219, 1226-27 (9th Cir. 2004) (holding that court judgments are not transactions under the FDCPA; a transaction under the FDCPA must involve some kind of business dealing or consensual obligation). We reject as unsupported by the record Lynaugh’s contentions that defendants made fraudulent misrepresentations in the district court. AFFIRMED. 2 20-15363

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.