Considering that, on 1 May 2005, the Bank and LBH enter into a sale and acquisition agreement on 1 May 2005 or before the balance date (as defined above) and that the Bank assigns to LBH all its rights, title and interest in the bank mortgage loans, and that LBH assigns all rights and obligations of the Bank with respect to bank mortgages under the bank Flow Servicing Agreement; In that regard, the applicant attempted to justify her position by proving that she was in physical possession of the note at the time of the application.  The note was last confirmed without recourse and therefore did not demonstrate the applicant`s ownership interest (see Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v Monica, 131 AD3d at 738-739;  Bank of Am., N.A. v. Kyle, 129 AD3d 1168, 1169, 2015.  In order to justify his position as holder of the note, the applicant offered, inter alia, the affidavit of Kevin Kerestes, Deputy Vice-President of Bank of America, N.A. (hereinafter BANA), which rejected that BANA was the applicant`s credit intermediary, that he had verified the records kept and held by bana in the course of his normal business and that the applicant held the note at the time of his affidavit in November 2011.  In addition, the Claimant submitted the affidavit of David Richard, Vice-President of Resurgent Capital Services, L.P., BANA`s credit sub-provider, who, after verifying the records kept and maintained by his employer in the course of his ordinary activities, asserted that the Applicant held the note at the time of his affidavit in June 2013. and that `[p] laintiff took possession of the note and mortgage in accordance with the [PSA] of 1 April 2006 and obtained the mark on 1 `1 April 2006 was physically taken into possession.` 2 Richard`s affidavit was sufficient to demonstrate a prima facie case that the applicant was in physical possession of the note at the time the action was brought in March 2010 (see Aurora Loan Servs, LLC v. Taylor, 25 NY3d 355, 361-362 [2015];  U.S. Bank N.A.

vs. Carnivale, _ AD3d _, _, 2016 N.Y. Slip Op 02701, *2 [2016];  Everhome Mtge. Co. v. Pettit, 135 AD3d 1054, 1055, 2016;  YMJ Meserole, LLC v. 98 Meserole St., LLC, 133 AD3d 848, 849 ,2015;  Compare JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. . .

.