AMCO Insurance Company et al v. Rhyna Rivas et al

Filing 10

MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS - ORDER DISMISSING ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANTS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND "MEDICARE," AND REMANDING ACTION TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT by Judge Dolly M. Gee: On 9/12/2017, the Court issued an Order to Show Ca use ("OSC") by 9/26/2017 why this action should not be dismissed as to Defendant United States, and reminded Plaintiffs of their obligation under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) to serve all defendants within 90 days of the filing of t he Complaint 9 . To date, Plaintiffs have not responded to the OSC. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiffs' action against Defendants United States and "Medicare" pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) for lack of prosecution. Further, since the only federal governmental defendants in this action have been dismissed, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the case. Therefore, this action is hereby REMANDED to the Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case Number 17K06211. ( Case Terminated. Made JS-6 ) Court Reporter: Not Reported. (gk)

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

Date

CV 17-5414-DMG (JPRx)

Title AMCO Insurance Company, et al. v. Rhyna Rivas, et al.
Present: The Honorable

JS-6 / REMAND

September 28, 2017
Page

1 of 1

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 DISMISSING ACTION AGAINST
DEFENDANTS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND “MEDICARE,”
AND REMANDING ACTION TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR
COURT
On May 16, 2017, Plaintiffs AMCO Insurance Company, Beverly Alvarado Medical
Building, and The Beaumont Company filed a Complaint against, inter alia, “Medicare.” [Doc.
# 1-1.] On July 21, 2017, the United States removed the action to this Court pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1), asserting that the United States had been sued as “Medicare[,]” and that
Plaintiff had not served the United States. [Doc. # 1.] On September 12, 2017, the Court issued
an Order to Show Cause (“OSC”) by September 26, 2017 why this action should not be
dismissed as to Defendant United States, and reminded Plaintiffs of their obligation under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) to serve all defendants within 90 days of the filing of the
Complaint.1 [Doc. # 9.] To date, Plaintiffs have not responded to the OSC.
Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiffs’ action
against Defendants United States and “Medicare” pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
4(m) for lack of prosecution. Further, since the only federal governmental defendants in this
action have been dismissed, the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the case. See 28
U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1) (providing that “[t]he United States or any agency thereof” may remove an
action from state court). Therefore, this action is hereby REMANDED to the Los Angeles
County Superior Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) (“If at any time before final judgment it
appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded.”).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
1

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) provides:
If a defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on motion or on
its own after notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that
defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good
cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period. This
subdivision (m) does not apply to service in a foreign country under Rule 4(f), 4(h)(2), or 4(j)(1).

CV-90

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Initials of Deputy Clerk KT