243 North Meridian LLC v. Rene Valencia et al
ORDER SUMMARILY REMANDING IMPROPERLY-REMOVED ACTION by Judge George H. King remanding case to San Bernardino County Superior Court, Case number UDFS1400702. (See document for specifics) (Attachments: # 1 CV-103) (adu)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
243 NORTH MERIDIAN, LLC,
Case No. ED CV 14-923-UA (DUTYx)
ORDER SUMMARILY REMANDING
RENE VALENCIA, et al.,
The Court will remand this unlawful detainer action to state court
summarily because defendant removed it improperly.
On May 8, 2014, defendant Mayra Diaz, having been sued in what appears
to be a routine unlawful detainer action in California Superior Court, lodged a
Notice of Removal of that action to this Court, and also presented an application to
proceed in forma pauperis. The Court has denied the latter application under
separate cover because the action was not properly removed. To prevent the
action from remaining in jurisdictional limbo, the Court issues this Order to
remand the action to state court.
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 diversity or federal question jurisdiction, and therefore removal is improper. 28
U.S.C. § 1441(a); see Exxon Mobil Corp v. Allapattah Svcs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546,
563, 125 S. Ct. 2611, 162 L. Ed. 2d 502 (2005). Here, defendant has asserted both
federal question jurisdiction and diversity jurisdiction as her bases for removal.
But the unlawful detainer action to be removed does not actually raise any federal
legal question. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1441; Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.
7 v. Thompson, 478 U.S. 804, 808, 106 S. Ct. 3229,92 L. Ed. 2d 650 (1986) ("the
8 question for removal jurisdiction must ... be determined by reference to the 'well9
pleaded complaint"'). Further, even if complete diversity of citizenship exists, the
amount in controversy does not exceed the diversity jurisdiction threshold of
$75,000. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441. Contrary to defendant's contention in the
12 Notice of Removal, the unlawful detainer complaint asserts that the amount in
controversy does not exceed $1 0,000.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: (1) this matter be REMANDED to the
Superior Court of California, San Bernardino County, Fontana District, 17780
Arrow Boulevard, Fontana, CA 923 35, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); (2) that the Clerk send a certified copy of this
Order to the state court; and (3) that the Clerk serve copies of this Order on the
Sj t.)"J I vf
United ~tates 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?