is insufficient proof of assignment. Absent a proper assignment of a deed of trust, Wells Fargo lacks standing to pursue foreclosure proceedings against Leyva. Mortgage note The proper method of transferring the right to payment under a mortgage note is governed by Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code Negotiable Instruments, because a mortgage note is a negotiable instrument. Birkland v. Silver State Financial Services, Inc., No. 2:10-CV-00035-KJD-LRL, 2010 WL 3419372, at *4 (D. Nev. Aug. 25, 2010). The obligor on the note has the right to know the identity of the entity that is “entitled to enforce” the mortgage note under Article 3, see NRS 104.3301, “[otherwise, the [homeowner] may pay funds to a stranger to the case.’ ’ In re Veal, 450 B.R. 897, 920-21 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2011) (<HOLDING>). If the homeowner pays funds to a “stranger to
holding that standing at inception of the suit was not established where the note attached to the complaint was not made payable to the plaintiff and contained no endorsement even though the original note endorsed in blank was introduced at trial holding in a bankruptcy case that ahmsi did not prove that it was the party entitled to enforce and receive payments from a mortgage note because it presented no evidence as to who possessed the original note it also presented no evidence showing endorsement of the note either in its favor or in favor of wells fargo for whom ahmsi allegedly was servicing the bankrupt partys loan holding that because a mortgage provides the security for the repayment of the note the person having standing to foreclose a note secured by a mortgage may be either the holder of the note or a nonholder in possession of the note who has the rights of a holder recognizing that under texas law it was enough for foreclosing party to establish that it was in possession of the note holding that there is no impermissible modification of the note because the very terms of the note allow for prepayment without a penalty