Case Explained: GOLDEN CREEK HOLDINGS, INC. V. MTC FINANCIAL, INC., ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-14 Docket: 2:24-cv-00177-RFB-NJK The ninth-circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Golden Creek Holdings, Inc.’s complaint for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Applying de novo review and the plausibility standard established in *Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly*, the panel held that the district court correctly determined that sending a March 2011 written acceleration notice did not trigger Nevada’s ancient-lien statute, Nev. Rev. Stat. § 106.240. Relying on the Nevada Supreme Court’s decision in *LV Debt Collect, LLC v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon*, the court explained that a debt becomes “wholly due” only pursuant to the terms of the mortgage or deed of trust or a recorded written extension thereof; a notice of intent to accelerate is not included in this statutory list because the borrower retains at least 30 days to cure the default after receiving such notice. Consequently, the complaint failed to state a plausible claim for relief, and the dismissal stands. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.