Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California

Without full specifics of each item you claim, it would be impossible to be certain, but the track record in court for homwowners claiming procedural irregularities of this kind is not good. I find no mention of "dual tracking" in any California appellate decision, published or unpublished. The robo-signing cases I found all went in the lender's favor. As for "breach of note," most promissory notes constitute only an obligation to pay on the part of the borrower and therefore could not be "breached" by the lender (as far as I know, anyway). You may have an adequate basis to get a court to enjoin a trustee's sale, but in general these cases almost always go in the lender's favor. I'd suggest you ask a local real-estate attorney for an initial conference.

It's irrelevant who signed the assignment of the note if the first lender ratified it. It could be a stamp, a computer, or even a guy working in a sweatshop as an agent for the lender. Robo-signing has no legal significance in and of itself.

I don't know what you are referring to by "dual tracking." I've been involved in secured land transactions for almost 12 years now, and have never heard of it.

As to the breach of the note, you breach the note when you fail to pay.

I suggest you speak to a competent real estate attorney familiar with foreclosure law, before setting off on some crusade based on internet research that could end up costing you a lot more in the end.