UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-D

ASSET-BACKED ISSUER DISTRIBUTION REPORT

PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF

THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the monthly distribution period from:

October 26, 2016 to November 25, 2016

Commission File Number of issuing entity: 333-185882-04

Central Index Key Number of issuing entity: 0001577310

Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2013-8

(Exact name of issuing entity as specified in its charter)

Commission File Number of depositor: 333-185882-01

Central Index Key Number of depositor: 0001176320

Sequoia Residential Funding, Inc.

(Exact name of depositor as specified in its charter)

Central Index Key Number of sponsor: 0001530239

RWT Holdings, Inc.

(Exact name of sponsor as specified in its charter)

Matthew J. Tomiak

(415) 389-7373

(Name and telephone number, including area code, of the person to contact in connection with this filing)

New York

(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization of the issuing entity)

46-3062396

46-3072712

(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

c/o Citibank, N.A. 388 Greenwich Street, 14th Floor New York, New York	10013
(Address of principal executive offices of the issuing entity)	(Zip Code)

(212) 816-5693

(Telephone number, including area code)

	Registered/reporting pursuant to (check one)			Name of exchange (If Section 12(b))
Title of class	Section 12(b)	Section 12(g)	Section 15(d)
A-1	¨	¨	x
A-2	¨	¨	x
A-3	¨	¨	x
A-I01	¨	¨	x
A-I02	¨	¨	x
B-1	¨	¨	x
B-2	¨	¨	x
B-3	¨	¨	x
B-4	¨	¨	x
B-5	¨	¨	x
R	¨	¨	x
LT-R	¨	¨	x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

PART I – DISTRIBUTION INFORMATION

Item 1. Distribution and Pool Performance Information.

On November 25, 2016, a distribution was made to holders of the certificates issued by Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2013-8.

The distribution report is attached as Exhibit 99.1 to this Form 10-D.

No assets securitized by Sequoia Residential Funding, Inc. (the “Depositor”) and held by Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2013-8 were the subject of a demand to repurchase or replace for breach of the representations and warranties during the monthly distribution period from October 26, 2016 to November 25, 2016.

RWT Holdings, Inc. (the “Securitizer”), an affiliate of the Depositor, is the sponsor and the Securitizer of assets held by Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2013-8. The Securitizer filed its first Form ABS-15G on February 6, 2012, and most recently filed its Form ABS-15G on February 10, 2016. The CIK number of the Securitizer is 0001530239.

PART II – OTHER INFORMATION

Item 2. Legal Proceedings.

The Depositor has been notified by Citibank, N.A. (“Citibank”) of an update to material pending legal proceedings to which Citibank is subject in connection with its role on certain RMBS transactions. The Depositor is not a party to, nor is this Sequoia transaction subject to, the pending legal proceedings.

Disclosure from Citibank, N.A., as securities administrator:

Citibank, N.A. (“Citibank”) is acting as Securities Administrator of this RMBS transaction. In the ordinary course of business, Citibank is involved in a number of legal proceedings, including in connection with its role as trustee of certain RMBS transactions. Certain of these Citibank as trustee-related matters are disclosed herein.

On June 18, 2014, a civil action was filed against Citibank in the Supreme Court of the State of New York by a group of investors in 48 private-label RMBS trusts for which Citibank allegedly serves or did serve as trustee, asserting claims for purported violations of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939 (the “Trust Indenture Act”), breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and negligence based on Citibank’s alleged failure to perform its duties as trustee for the 48 RMBS trusts. On November 24, 2014, plaintiffs sought leave to withdraw this action. On the same day, a smaller subset of similar plaintiff investors in 27 private-label RMBS trusts for which Citibank allegedly serves or did serve as trustee, filed a new civil action against Citibank in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York asserting similar claims as the prior action filed in state court. In January 2015, the court closed plaintiffs’ original state court action. Citibank’s motion to dismiss the federal complaint was fully briefed as of May 13, 2015. On September 8, 2015, the federal court dismissed all claims as to 24 of the 27 trusts and allowed certain of the claims to proceed as to the other three trusts. Subsequently, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed all claims with respect to two of the three trusts. This case is still pending as to the one remaining trust at issue.

On November 24, 2015, the same investors that brought the federal case brought a new civil action in the Supreme Court of the State of New York related to 25 private-label RMBS trusts for which Citibank allegedly serves or did serve as trustee. This case includes the 24 trusts previously dismissed in the federal action, and one additional trust. The investors assert claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of duty to avoid conflicts of interest, and violation of New York’s Streit Act (the “Streit Act”). Citibank’s motion to dismiss was fully briefed as of April 15, 2016. Following oral argument on Citibank’s motion to dismiss, Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on August 5, 2016. Citibank’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint was fully briefed as of October 21, 2016. We await a decision.

On August 19, 2015, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as Receiver for a financial institution filed a civil action against Citibank in the Southern District of New York. This action relates to one private-label RMBS trust for which Citibank formerly served as trustee. FDIC asserts claims for breach of contract, violation of the Streit Act, and violation of the Trust Indenture Act. Citibank jointly briefed a motion to dismiss with The Bank of New York Mellon and U.S. Bank, entities that have also been sued by FDIC in their capacity as trustee, and whose cases are also in front of Judge Carter. Defendants’ joint motion to dismiss was fully briefed as of March 22, 2016. On September 30, 2016, the Court granted Citibank’s motion to dismiss the complaint without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On October 14, 2016, FDIC filed a motion for reargument or relief from judgment from the Court’s dismissal order. On October 25, 2016, the court granted leave for defendants to file an opposition brief. Defendants filed their opposition on November 15, 2016 and Plaintiff filed its reply brief on November 22, 2016. We await a decision from the Court on plaintiff’s motion.

There can be no assurances as to the outcome of litigation or the possible impact of litigation on the trustee or the RMBS trusts. However, Citibank denies liability and continues to vigorously defend against these litigations. Furthermore, neither the above-disclosed litigations nor any other pending legal proceeding involving Citibank will materially affect Citibank’s ability to perform its duties as securities administrator under the pooling and servicing agreement for this RMBS transaction.

The Depositor has been notified by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”) of an update to material pending legal proceedings to which Wells Fargo is subject in connection with its role as trustee of certain RMBS transactions.

This registrant is not a party to, nor is this Sequoia transaction subject to, the pending legal proceedings.

Disclosure from Wells Fargo, N.A.:

On June 18, 2014, a group of institutional investors filed a civil complaint in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., in its capacity as trustee under 276 residential mortgage backed securities (“RMBS”) trusts, which was later amended on July 18, 2014, to increase the number of trusts to 284 RMBS trusts. On November 24, 2014, the plaintiffs filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss the state court action without prejudice. That same day, a group of institutional investors filed a civil complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “District Court“) against Wells Fargo Bank, alleging claims against the bank in its capacity as trustee for 274 RMBS trusts (the “Complaint”). In December 2014, the plaintiffs’ motion to voluntarily dismiss their original state court action was granted.

As with the prior state court action, the Complaint is one of six similar complaints filed contemporaneously against RMBS trustees (Deutsche Bank, Citibank, HSBC, Bank of New York Mellon and US Bank) by a group of institutional investor plaintiffs. The Complaint against Wells Fargo Bank alleges that the trustee caused losses to investors and asserts causes of action based upon, among other things, the trustee's alleged failure to (i) enforce repurchase obligations of mortgage loan sellers for purported breaches of representations and warranties, (ii) notify investors of alleged events of default purportedly caused by breaches by mortgage loan servicers, and (iii) abide by appropriate standards of care following alleged events of default. Relief sought includes money damages in an unspecified amount, reimbursement of expenses, and equitable relief. Other cases alleging similar causes of action have been filed against Wells Fargo Bank and other trustees in the same court by RMBS investors in these and other transactions, and these cases have been consolidated before the same judge. A similar case was filed in NY state court by a different investor.

On January 19, 2016, an order was entered in connection with the Complaint in which the District Court declined to exercise jurisdiction over 261 trusts at issue in the Complaint; the District Court also allowed Plaintiffs to file amended complaints if they so chose, and three amended complaints have been filed. On March 28, 2016, the BlackRock Plaintiffs filed a new complaint in state court in San Francisco with regard to the trusts that had been dismissed in the District Court’s January 19 Order; that action was dismissed on September 28, 2016 and the court held that any claims relating to the trusts at issue must be filed in New York state court. Motions to Dismiss all of the federal actions are pending.

There can be no assurances as to the outcome of the litigation, or the possible impact of the litigation on the trustee or the RMBS trusts. However, Wells Fargo Bank denies liability and believes that it has performed its obligations under the RMBS trusts in good faith, that its actions were not the cause of any losses to investors, and that it has meritorious defenses, and it intends to contest the plaintiffs’ claims vigorously.

Item 10. Exhibits.

(a) The following is a list of documents filed as part of this Report on Form 10-D:

(99.1): Monthly report distributed to holders of the certificates issued by Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2013-8, relating to the November 25, 2016 distribution.

(b) The exhibits required to be filed by the Registrant pursuant to this Form 10-D are listed above and in the Exhibit Index that immediately follows the signature page hereof.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

Sequoia Residential Funding, Inc.

(Depositor)

/s/ Matthew Tomiak

Matthew Tomiak, Vice President

Date: December 9, 2016

EXHIBIT INDEX

Exhibit Number	Description
Exhibit 99.1	Monthly report distributed to holders of the certificates issued by Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2013-8, relating to the November 25, 2016 distribution.