Pacific Court Pine Square Partners v. Davion Carson et al

Filing 9

ORDER SUMMARILY REMANDING IMPROPERLY-REMOVED ACTION by Judge George H. Wu, remanding case to Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case number 16F06027. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (mrgo)

Download PDF
JS-6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT :~ E CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 12 Case No. CV 17-0847 GW (SSx) PACIFIC COURT PINE SQUARE PARTNERS, Plaintiff, ORDER SUNIl~IARILY REMANDING 13 v. IMPROPERLY-REMOVED ACTION 14 DAVION CARSON, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 The Court will remand this unlawful detainer action to state 18 court summarily because Defendants removed it improperly. 19 P ~~~ On 21 22 February 2, 2017, Defendants Davion Carson and Dezinae Carson, having been sued in a routine unlawful detainer action in California state court, filed a Notice Of Removal of that action 23 to this Court and also presented applications to proceed in forma 24 pauperis. 25 The Court has denied the prevent the 28 applications under separate cover because the action was not properly removed. 26 27 latter action from remaining in To jurisdictional limbo, the Court issues this Order to remand the action to state court. 1 Simply stated, this action not have could been originally 2 filed in federal court because the complaint does not competently 3 allege 4 jurisdiction, 5 ยง 1441(a); see Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Svcs., Inc., 545 6 U.S. 546, 563 (2005). 7 federal 8 Demurrer, 9 Defendant[s'] rights and Plaintiff's duties under federal law." facts supporting and question a therefore diversity removal is federal-question or improper. 28 U.S.C. Defendants' Notice Of Removal asserts that exists jurisdiction pleading[,] 10 (Notice Of Removal at 2). 11 confer federal either question depends] on because ~~Defendant[s'] determination the of These allegations are inadequate to jurisdiction. See Merrell Dow F~~ Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Thompson, 478 U.S. 804, 808 (1986) ("A 13 defense that raises a federal question is inadequate to confer 14 federal jurisdiction."). 15 16 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that (1) this matter be REMANDED 17 to the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, 275 18 Magnolia Ave., Long Beach, CA 90802, for lack of subject matter 19 jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ~ 1447(c); (2) the Clerk send 20 a certified copy of this Order to the state court; and (3) the 21 Clerk serve copies of this Order on the parties. 22 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. 24 25 26 27 DATED: February 14, 2017 GEORGE H. WU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 28 2

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?