NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R.1:36-3.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant Rodney Lee appeals from a June 2, 2016 final judgment of foreclosure entered in favor of plaintiff Nationstar Mortgage LLC, and from an August 1, 2016 order denying his motion to vacate the final judgment.1 We affirm.

Defendant gave Bank of America, N.A. a note and mortgage in 2007, as security for a $192,000 loan. The bank filed a foreclosure complaint in 2009, alleging that defendant defaulted on the loan. Defendant did not deny that the loan was in default, but raised defenses based on the bank's alleged lack of standing. The trial court granted summary judgment on June 21, 2010, striking defendant's answer. The court permitted Nationstar to substitute as plaintiff in 2014, and final judgment was issued on June 2, 2016. On August 1, 2016, the trial court denied defendant's motion to vacate the final judgment, for reasons set forth in a written statement accompanying the order.

Points one through five of defendant's appellate brief challenge the June 21, 2010 summary judgment order. However, plaintiff did not perfect an appeal from that order, because he did not file the transcript of Judge Harriet F. Klein's oral opinion, which the order states was placed on the record on June 18, 2010. See R. 2:5-3(a), (e) (requiring an appellant to order, serve and file the transcript of the trial court record). Nor did defendant file the transcript of Judge Walter Koprowski, Jr.'s oral statement of his reasons for entering final judgment over defendant's objections.

Even without the transcripts, however, we are able to conclude that defendant's standing argument is without merit. Contrary to defendant's assertion, the bank submitted legally competent evidence establishing its standing to file the foreclosure complaint and to obtain the final judgment. Because defendant did not properly perfect his appeal from the summary judgment order and the final judgment, we decline to further address his arguments as to those two orders. See Cipala v. Lincoln Tech. Inst., 179 N.J. 45, 55 (2004).

Turning to the August 1, 2016 order, we find no abuse of discretion in Judge Koprowski's decision to deny defendant's motion to vacate the final judgment. See Housing Authority of Morristown v. Little, 135 N.J. 274, 283 (1994). We affirm the August 1, 2016 order for the reasons set forth in Judge Koprowski's written statement annexed to the order. Defendant's arguments as to the August 1, 2016 order are without sufficient merit to warrant further discussion. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E).

Affirmed.