discussed Cited "see" William Villarroel, et al. v. Recology Inc., et al. See 9 Sanche, 876 F.2d 897 , at *7 (citing Danner v. Himmelfarb, 858 F.2d 515, 524 (9th Cir. 1988), for 10 || the principle that “[w]e have held that the passage of time and the expense of refiling a case in 11 state court are insufficient to establish abuse of discretion”). 12 Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ motion for an indicative ruling in their favor with respect to their 13 Rule 60(b) argument is DENIED. 14 || 1.

discussed Cited "see, e.g." Corales v. Flagstar Bank, FSB John, 2011 WL 4543658 , at *3 (citing RCW 61.24.005(2) (defining Beneficiary as the “the holder of the instrument of document evidencing the obligations secured by the deed of trust”)); see also, e.g., In re United Home Loans, 71 B.R. 885, 891 (Bankr.W.D.Wash.1987), aff'd, 876 F.2d 897 (9th Cir.1989) (“An assignment of a deed of trust ... is valid between the parties whether or not the assignment is ever recorded....