Christine Boyd v. Wells Fargo Bank NA et al
Filing
43
MEMORANDUM: Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER REMANDING CASE TO STATE COURT by Judge Dale S. Fischer: Defendants failed to provide grounds for the Court to maintain jurisdiction. Accordingly, this matter is REMANDED to the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. (Made JS-6 Case Terminated.) (Attachments: # 1 CV-103 Letter of Transmittal - Remand to Superior Court) (jp)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
LASC, Northeast District
Case No.: GC04755
MEMORANDUM
JS 6
Case No.
Title
CV 11-6699 DSF (FFMx)
Date
12-20-11
Christine Boyd v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al.
Present: The
Honorable
DALE S. FISCHER, United States District Judge
Debra Plato
Deputy Clerk
Not Present
Court Reporter
Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:
Attorneys Present for Defendants:
Not Present
Not Present
Proceedings:
(IN CHAMBERS): ORDER REMANDING CASE TO STATE COURT
On August 15, 2011, this action was removed to this Court based on federal
question jurisdiction. On December 19, 2011, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint that
no longer contains federal claims. As Plaintiff’s federal claim was the only basis for
subject matter jurisdiction, the Court now has discretion to retain or to remand the
supplemental claims. 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c) (“The district courts may decline to exercise
supplemental jurisdiction over a claim under subsection (a) if . . . the district court has
dismissed all claims over which it has original jurisdiction . . . .”) Given that this
litigation is at an early stage, the Court indicated to counsel that it was inclined to remand
this matter to state court. See id. Comm. on 1988 Rev.
Defendants failed to provide grounds for the Court to maintain jurisdiction.
Accordingly, this matter is REMANDED to the Superior Court of California, County of
Los Angeles.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
CV-90 (12/02)
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Page 1 of 1
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?