Whether a lender can use res-judicata to bar examination of an invalid foreclosure that was barred by federal-consumer-protection-law

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW The Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601 et seq., provides special rescission ‘ . ; rights for loans secured by a borrower's principal , dwelling. This Court’s unanimous opinion in ; Jesinoski v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 135 S. ; : Ct. 790 (2015) held that rescission is effected when : A the borrower notifies the lender of his intention to : rescind. : In this case, Petitioner sought to appeal to . United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit a judgment of the Los Angeles District Court’s which held that res judicata bars Petitioner from ; seeking the protection afforded by the Act in the foreclosure of the Petitioner’s home. Because rescission occurred prior to the foreclosure, however, the purported lender had no lawful right to foreclose. The lender’s security interest had been : extinguished as a matter of law by the rescission. The foreclosure itself was, therefore, not valid. The question presented is: Whether, where the right to foreclose is extinguished as a matter of law by federal statute ; and as clarified in a unanimous Supreme Court : : decision, and a home owner’s home is foreclosed upon, a lender can use res judicata to bar examination of an invalid foreclosure that was barred by federal consumer protection law. | , ; ii