ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE
The district court granted summary judgment for respondents, relying in part on Glass v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., Docket No. 78325, Order of Affirmance, at *2-3 (July 1, 2020). In Glass, we reasoned that because a Notice of Rescission rescinded a previously recorded Notice of Default, the Notice of Rescission “effectively cancelled the acceleration” triggered by the Notice of Default such that NRS 106.240’s 10-year period was reset. Id. at *3. Because the Notice of Rescission in this case is substantively identical to that in Glass, we agree with the district court that the Notice of Rescission had the same effect and that respondent U.S. Bank retained an enforceable lien against the subject property. We are not persuaded by appellants arguments that Glass is distinguishable from this case. 2
Accordingly, we
ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED.
3
FOOTNOTES
2
. Appellant contends that the district court should have granted its request for NRCP 56(d) relief to conduct discovery into the contents of a letter that respondent U.S. Banks predecessor sent to the former homeowner before the Notice of Default was recorded. However, given our conclusion that the Notice of Rescission was effective to decelerate the loan, the contents of that letter are moot, and the NRCP 56(d) continuance was properly denied.
3
. The Honorable Mark Gibbons, Senior Justice, participated in the decision of this matter under a general order of assignment.