MEMORANDUM **

David Alexander appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his claims for quiet title and slander of title pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. 1

1. The appellees’ motion to dismiss this appeal as moot is denied. See Cal.Civ.Proc. Code § 761.020.

2. Alexander acknowledges a valid deed of trust was recorded against the property when he purchased it in 2011. That the subsequent assignment lacked language explicitly transferring an interest in the underlying note does not render the deed of trust invalid. See Domarad v. Fisher & Burke, Inc., 270 Cal.App.2d 543, *719 76 Cal.Rptr. 529, 536 (1969) (“[A] deed of trust is inseparable from the debt, ... and an attempt to assign the deed of trust without a transfer of the debt is without effect.”); Shimpones v. Stickney, 219 Cal. 637, 28 P.2d 673, 678 (1934) (“The plaintiff in a quiet title suit is not helped by the weakness of his adversary’s title, but must stand upon the strength of his or her own. The fatal weakness in plaintiffs position is that she ... refused to pay [her debt].”).

3. Because Alexander failed to raise arguments pertaining to the slander of title claim in his opening brief, his challenge to the district court’s dismissal of this claim is deemed waived. See United States v. Kama, 394 F.3d 1236, 1238 (9th Cir. 2005).

AFFIRMED.