Canterbury Lots 68 LLC v. Benjamin Delgadillo et al

Filing 5

ORDER by Acting Chief Judge Dean D. Pregerson summarily remanding improperly-removed action to Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, Northeast District, Pasadena Courthouse, 300 East Walnut St., Pasadena, CA 91101; Case number 13P00423. (SEE ATTACHED REMAND ORDER) [Case Terminated, Made JS-6] (Attachments: # 1 letter to Superior Court) (esa) (Attachment 1 replaced on 4/19/2013) (esa).

Download PDF
HLEO 1 2 7013 APR 18 P11 5:16 3 FCT COURT CLERK U. CENTRAL 0IS1I OF CALIF. RV CR3 IDE 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CANTERBURY LOTS 68, LLC, 12 Plaintiff, 13 vs. 14 Case No. CV 13-2201-UA (DUTYx) ORDER SUMMARILY REMANDING IMPROPERLY-REMOVED ACTION BENJAMIN DELGADILLO, et al., 15 16 Defendants. 17 18 19 20 The Court will remand this unlawful detainer action to state court summarily because defendant removed it improperly. On March 27, 2013, defendant Janine Delgadillo, having been sued in what 21 appears to be a routine unlawful detainer action in California Superior Court, 22 lodged a Notice of Removal of that action to this Court, and also presented an 23 application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court has denied the latter 24 application under separate cover because the action was not properly removed. To 25 prevent the action from remaining in jurisdictional limbo, the Court issues this 26 Order to remand the action to state court. 27 Simply stated, plaintiff could not have brought this action in federal court in the first place, in that defendant does not competently allege facts supplying either 1 1 diversity or federal question jurisdiction, and therefore removal is improper. 28 2 U.S.C. § 1441 (a); see Exxon Mobil Corp v. Allapattah Svcs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546, 3 4 563 1 125 S. Ct. 2611 3 162 L. Ed. 2d 502 (2005). Here, defendant has asserted both federal question and diversity jurisdiction as her basis for removal. But as 5 described in more detail in the Order Denying Defendant’s Request to Proceed 6 Without Prepayment of Filing Fee, because the unlawful detainer action to be 7 removed does not actually raise any federal claim, and because the amount in 8 controversy does not exceed $75,000 and there is no allegation of diversity of 9 citizenship, there is no basis to assert either federal question or diversity 10 jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332, 1441. 11 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: (1) this matter be REMANDED to the 12 Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, Northeast District, 300 East 13 Walnut Street, Pasadena, CA 91101, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction 14 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); (2) that the Clerk send a certified copy of this 15 Order to the state court; and (3) that the Clerk serve copies of this Order on the 16 parties. 17 18 19 DATED: . 4 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 its CHIEF UNITED STATESDISTRICT JUDGE Actink le wk~-TE-R5;04 U

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?