Freedom Home Mortgage Corporation (FN) v. Ramos

Filing 8

ORDER denying 2 Defendant's Motion/Application for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. FURTHER ORDERED that if Defendant does not pay the filing fee by May 16, 2014, the Clerk of the Court shall remand this case to state court. FINALLY ORDE RED that if Defendant pays the filing fee on or before May 16, 2014, then, by May 23, 2014, Defendant shall file a supplement to the notice of removal properly alleging federal subject matter jurisdiction or this case will be remanded on that basis. Signed by Senior Judge James A Teilborg on 5/5/2014.(TLB)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Freedom Home Mortgage Corp.,

10

Plaintiff,

11

vs.

12
Betty Ramos,
13
Defendant.
14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV 14-912-PHX-JAT
ORDER

15
16
17

On April 30, 2014, Defendant, pro se, removed this forcible entry and detainer action
from state court to federal court. Defendant also moved to proceed in forma pauperis.

18

From Defendant’s application, it appears she makes $4,400.00 per month. The Court

19

finds this is sufficient income to pay the filing fee and will deny the application to proceed

20

in forma pauperis. Defendant will be given the option of paying the filing fee or having this

21

case remanded to state court.

22

Further, from the notice of removal, it appears that this Court lacks subject matter

23

jurisdiction over this case. Specifically, Defendant’s allegations of subject matter jurisdiction

24

all appear to be based on either proposed counterclaims or affirmative defenses. However,

25

subject matter jurisdiction must be based on the allegations in the complaint. See Takeda v.

26

Northwestern Nat. Life Ins. Co., 765 F.2d 815, 822 n. 9 (9th Cir. 1985) (“[U]nder the present

27

statutory scheme as it has existed since 1887, a defendant may not remove a case to federal

28

court unless the plaintiff’s complaint establishes that the case ‘arises under’ federal

1

law.”(quoting Franchise Tax Board v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. 1,

2

10 (1983)).

3

Based on the foregoing,

4

IT IS ORDERED that the application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is

5

denied.

6
7

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Defendant does not pay the filing fee by May
16, 2014, the Clerk of the Court shall remand this case to state court.

8

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that if Defendant pays the filing fee on or before May

9

16, 2014, then, by May 23, 2014, Defendant shall file a supplement to the notice of removal

10

properly alleging federal subject matter jurisdiction or this case will be remanded on that

11

basis.

12

DATED this 5th day of May, 2014.

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-