Ocean Ridge Equities LLC v. Amrit Lal et al

Filing 9

IN CHAMBERSORDER REMANDING CASE TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION ORDER by Judge Dolly M. Gee remanding case to Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case number 14F09646 Case Terminated. On October 15, 201 4, Plaintiff Ocean Ridge Equities LLC filed an unlawful detaineraction in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. (See Notice of Removal, Exh. 1 [Doc. # 1].) Plaintiffs Complaint seeks judgment against Lal for possession of certain real property located in Harbor City, California (the Property). (See minutes for further details) This action is hereby REMANDED to the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. Defendants motion to remand and motion for sanctions is hereby VACATED as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED. Made JS-6, (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (yl)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL
Case No.

Date

CV 15-00460 DMG (DTBx)

Title Ocean Ridge Equities LLC v. Amrit Lal
Present: The Honorable

JS-6 / REMAND

January 29, 2015
Page

1 of 2

DOLLY M. GEE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

KANE TIEN
Deputy Clerk

NOT REPORTED
Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s)
None Present

Attorneys Present for Defendant(s)
None Present

Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS—ORDER REMANDING CASE TO LOS ANGELES
COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER
JURISDICTION
On October 15, 2014, Plaintiff Ocean Ridge Equities LLC filed an unlawful detainer
action in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. (See Notice of Removal,
Exh. 1 [Doc. # 1].) Plaintiff’s Complaint seeks judgment against Lal for possession of certain
real property located in Harbor City, California (the “Property”). (Compl. ¶ 8.) The Complaint
alleges a single cause of action for unlawful detainer and seeks possession of the Property as well
as daily rental value damages for the period of October 14, 2014 through the date of entry of
judgment. (Compl. at p. 2.)
On January 22, 2015, Defendant Amrit Lal removed the case to this Court, asserting
federal question jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Defendant asserts that this case
implicates the Fair Housing Act as well as “the 5th and 14th amendments to the US Constitution,
the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Civil Rights Act, the Age Discrimination Act, and
various Presidential ‘Executive Orders’ pertaining to environmental justice, Equal Opportunity
and Discrimination in housing.” (Notice of Removal at 3-4.) Plaintiff’s Complaint does not
make any reference to these laws. If any of these anti-discrimination and civil rights statutes
have any relevance whatsoever to this action, it is as the basis for an affirmative defense. It is
axiomatic, however, that federal jurisdiction cannot rest upon an actual or anticipated defense.
See Vaden v. Discover Bank, 556 U.S. 49,129 S. Ct. 1262, 1272, 173 L. Ed. 2d 206 (2009).
Furthermore, Defendant previously attempted to remove this same case to federal court.
See Ocean Ridge Equities LLC v. Amrit Lal et al., 14-CV-09312-DMG(RZx) (2014). In that
case, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Remand, which the Court granted for lack of opposition. If
Defendant attempts to remove the same state action to federal court again, the Court will impose
monetary sanctions.

CV-90

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Initials of Deputy Clerk KT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL
Case No.

CV 15-00460 DMG (DTBx)

Title Ocean Ridge Equities LLC v. Amrit Lal

Date

JS-6 / REMAND

January 29, 2015
Page

2 of 2

This action is hereby REMANDED to the Superior Court of California, County of Los
Angeles. Defendant’s motion to remand and motion for sanctions is hereby VACATED as
moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

CV-90

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Initials of Deputy Clerk KT