Corp., Docket No. 56054 (Order Affirming in Part, Reversing in Part and Remanding, December 14, 2012). While that appeal was pending, and without respondent notifying this court, the notice of default that formed the basis for the contested nonjudicial foreclosure was rescinded. In light of that rescission, the district court properly concluded on remand that appellant's NRS 107.080 claim against respondent was moot, as there were no longer any pending foreclosure proceedings involving respondent. 2 Holt v. Reg'l Tr. Servs. Corp., 127 Nev. „ 266 P.3d 602, 606 (2011) ("A notice of rescission renders moot disputes concerning the notice of default or its timing."). Accordingly, the district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of respondent with regard to appellant's underlying NRS 107.080 claim. We therefore ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.

C.J.

Pickering

CiIJL Saitta J.

2Appellant takes issue with the district court's determination that his NRS 107.080 claim was not "ripe." The tenor of the district court's order, however, properly reflects the reality that any future NRS 107.080 claim will not ripen until a subsequent notice of default is recorded and that the underlying NRS 107.080 claim no longer involves a justiciable controversy.

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A ie. cc: Hon. Jessie Elizabeth Walsh, District Judge David Philip Smith Larsen & Wixom Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 194/4 em