Many of these statutes seek to increase transparency in the foreclosure process by requiring that foreclosure notices provide more information to the homeowner about the parties involved in the foreclosure proceedings. See generally John Rao et al., Nat’l Consumer Law Ctr., Foreclosures 146-47 & n. 349 (3d ed.2010) (compiling laws in California, Colorado, Georgia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and North Carolina). California, under whose law a number of claims in this case arise, has recently enacted the Homeowner Bill of Rights. Among other things, the new California statute seeks to ensure that “borrowers who may qualify for a foreclosure alternative are considered for, and have a meaningful opportunity to obtain, available loss mitigat , 770 N.W.2d 487, 501 (Minn.2009) (<HOLDING>); Edelstein v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 286 P.3d
holding that the mere absence of a tape recording or transcript does not mean that an alien is deprived of his due process rights holding that informant acted under color of law when fbi supervised recording holding that minnesota law does not require recording of assignments of promissory notes among mers members holding rhode island law does not require recording of assignments among mers members holding that a letter describing discussions between board members did not support conclusion that the three members whom a jury could find individually acted with racial animus had an understanding among themselves to do so