*1 Before TJOFLAT, JORDAN, and ROSENBAUM, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
David Mejia brought this case in the Circuit Court for Palm Beach County, Florida, by filing a two-count complaint. Count I alleged that Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC (“Ocwen”), did not provide an adequate response to Korte & Wortman’s request under 12 C.F.R. § 1024.36(d)(2)(i)(A). It was inadequate because: “Defendant did respond to the RFI, however, Defendant’s response was insufficient in that it failed to include a phone number for the investor of the subject loan.” Comp. ¶ 17. Count I sought actual damages and attorney’s fees. Count II alleged that Ocwen “has shown a pattern of disregard to the requirement imposed . . . by the Federal Reserve Regulation X,” Comp. ¶ 35, and sought statutory damages and attorney’s fees.
Ocwen removed the case to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, and moved to dismiss it for failure to state a claim for relief. Mejia did not respond to Ocwen’s motion as required by the Court’s local rules, so the Court took the motion under advisement without the benefit of any explanation from Mejia’s counsel as to why Ocwen’s motion should not be granted. In a comprehensive through-going order, the Court granted Ocwen’s motion to dismiss.
Mejia appeals, arguing that the District Court erred in holding that Ocwen, as servicer, was not obligated to provide a phone number for the owner of the loan. We find no merit in the argument, and accordingly affirm for the reasons stated in the District Court’s dispositive order. Because we anticipate that Mejia’s claims
2