Sfr Investments Pool 1 v. Wells Fargo Bank

VACATE the order denying preliminary injunctive relief AND REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this order.

Plett tifte ' J. Pickering rja:P. J. Saitta

PARRAGUIRRE, J., concurring:

For the reasons stated in the SFR Investments Pool I, LLC v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 130 Nev. 334 P.3d 408 (2014), dissent, I disagree that respondent lost its lien priority by virtue of the homeowners association's nonjudicial foreclosure sale. I recognize, however, that SFR Investments is now the controlling law and, thusly, concur in the disposition of this appeal.

cc: Hon. Timothy C. Williams, District Judge Howard Kim & Associates

David J. Merrill, P.C.

Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF

NEVADA (0) 1947A e