Appellants are eleven homeowners (the Homeowners) who filed suit against Citi-Mortgage, Inc.; Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.; MERSCORP, Inc.; and Federal National Mortgage Association (the Lenders/Servicers) for unlawfully foreclosing or attempting to foreclose on their home mortgages. The Homeowners also filed suit against Peterson, Fram & Bergman, P.A. (the Law Firm), which they claim assisted with some of the foreclosures. The district court 1 dismissed the Homeowners’ complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and 12(b)(6). We affirm.

The Homeowners’ amended complaint asserted four claims against the Lenders/Servicers, one of which was also asserted against the Law Firm. On appeal, the Homeowners have abandoned all but their quiet title claim against the Lenders/Servi-cers under Minnesota Statute section 559.01. The district court dismissed the quiet title claim, concluding that it failed to satisfy the Rule 8 pleading standard. See D. Ct. Order of June 25, 2012, at 4-5. Notwithstanding this failure, the district court also concluded that it failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted because it was based on the discredited show-me-the-note theory. See id. at 6-7. The Homeowners’ quiet title claim is identical to the claim we recently rejected in Karnatcheva v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 704 F.3d 545, 547-48 (8th Cir. 2013). Because the Homeowners have done nothing to distinguish this claim from the one *564 found lacking in Karnatcheva, we affirm the district court’s dismissal.

The judgment is affirmed.