"California's nonjudicial foreclosure scheme is set forth in Civil Code sections 2924 through 2924k, which 'provide a comprehensive framework for the regulation of a nonjudicial foreclosure sale pursuant to a power of sale contained in a deed of trust.' . 'These provisions cover every aspect of exercise of the power of sale contained in a deed of trust.' . 'The purposes of this comprehensive scheme are threefold: (1) to provide the creditor/beneficiary with a quick, inexpensive and efficient remedy against a defaulting debtor/trustor; (2) to protect the debtor/trustor from wrongful loss of the property; (3) to ensure that a properly conducted sale is final between the parties and conclusive as to a bona fide purchaser.' . 'Because of the exhaustive nature of this scheme, California appellate courts have refused to read any additional requirements into the non-judicial foreclosure statute.'" (Gomes, supra, 192 Cal.App.4th at p. 1154.) "'A nonjudicial foreclosure sale is accompanied by a common law presumption that it "was conducted regularly and fairly." . This presumption may only be rebutted by substantial evidence of prejudicial procedural irregularity. . . . . It is the burden of the party challenging the trustee's sale to prove such irregularity and thereby overcome the presumption of the sale's regularity.'" (Lona v. Citibank, N.A. (2011) 202 Cal.App.4th 89, 105.) As a result, a plaintiff must plead facts affirmatively demonstrating that a sale is somehow invalid. (Fontenot v. Wells Fargo, N.A. (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 256, 270 (Fontenot) given the presumption of regularity, "the burden rested with plaintiff affirmatively to plead facts demonstrating the impropriety" of a foreclosure sale; see also Gomes, supra, 192 Cal.App.4th at p. 1156 and Herrera v. Federal National Mortgage Assn. (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 1495, 1506 (Herrera) noting absence of allegations of specific facts in affirming orders sustaining demurrers.)