Federal National Mortgage Association v. Andres M. Hernandez Jr et al

Filing 3

ORDER by Chief Judge George H. King summarily remanding action to Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, Long Beach Courthouse, 275 Magnolia Avenue, Long Beach, CA 90802; Case number 13F07052. (SEE ATTACHED ORDER) [Case Terminated, Made JS-6] (Attachments: # 1 Letter Sup Ct) (esa)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, A/KA FANNIE MAE, Plaintiff, 12 13 V. ANDRES M. HERNANDEZ, JR.; JOSE LUIS HERNANDEZ; AND DOES 1 TO 10, INCLUSIVE, No. CV 13-8783 UA (DUTYx) ORDER SUMMARILY REMANDING ACTION TO STATE COURT AND PROHIBITING DEFENDANT FROM FILING ANY FURTHER NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT CASE NO. 1 3F07052 Defendants. 16 17 The Court will remand "Defendant, Jose Hernandez[’s] Notice of Removal of the 18 19 Above Entitled Case to the United States District Court for the Central District of 20 California," Case No. 131707052, to state court summarily because Defendant removed it 21 improperly. On November 27, 2013, Defendant Jose Hernandez, having been sued in what 22 23 appears to be a routine unlawful detainer action in California state court, lodged a Notice 24 of Removal of that action to this Court and also presented an application to proceed 25 informapauperis. Defendant has previously removed this same unlawful detainer 26 proceeding on one prior occasion. On the prior occasion, this Court remanded the action 27 noting that federal jurisdiction does not exist. 28 I/I The Court has denied the informapauperis application under separate cover I 2 because the action, again, was not properly removed. To prevent the action from 3 remaining in jurisdictional limbo, the Court issues this Order to remand the action to 4 state court. Moreover, to prevent Defendant from further abusing the federal court to 5 obstruct his state proceedings without any basis, the Court issues this order prohibiting 6 him from filing any further notice of removal with respect to this unlawful detainer 7 action. Simply stated, as the Court has previously determined, Plaintiff could not have 8 9 brought this action in federal court in the first place, in that Defendant does not 10 competently allege facts supplying either diversity or federal-question jurisdiction, and 11 therefore removal is improper. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a); see Exxon Mobil Corp v. Allapattah 12 Svcs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546, 563 9 125 S. Ct. 2611, 162 L. Ed. 2d 502 (2005). Even if 13 complete diversity of citizenship existed, the amount in controversy does not exceed the 14 diversity-jurisdiction threshold of $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441(b). On the 15 contrary, the unlawful-detainer complaint recites that the amount in controversy does not 16 exceed $10,000. Nor does Plaintiffs unlawful detainer action raise any federal legal question. See 17 18 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1441(b). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that (1) this matter be REMANDED to the 19 20 Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, Long Beach Courthouse, 275 21 Magnolia Avenue, Long Beach, California 90802 for lack of subject matter jurisdiction 22 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); (2) that the Clerk send a certified copy of this Order to 23 the state court; and (3) that the Clerk serve copies of this Order on the parties. 24 III 25 I/I 26 III 27 III 28 II! 2 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Jose Hernandez is prohibited from filing any 2 further Notice of Removals of this case from state court without an Order of the Court or 3 of the Chief Judge of the Central District of California allowing him to do so. IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 6 DATED: / 7 8 GEORGE H. KINk [ Chief United States Disid Judge 9 10 11 Presented b 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 IS! FREDERICK F. MUMM FREDERICK F. MUMM United States Magistrate Judge

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?