Carlos V. Farias v. Quicken Loans, Inc. et al

Filing 14

MINUTE (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER REMANDING ACTION TO SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT; ORDER STAYING REMAND ORDER UNTIL APRIL 11, 2017 by Judge John F. Walter: the Court hereby REMANDS this action to San Bernardino County Superior Court. The Court STA YS this Order until 4/11/2017. Because Plaintiff originally filed this action in San Bernardino County Superior Court, the Court assumes that Plaintiff does not object to the remand of this action. However, in the unlikely event Plaintiff wishes to r emain in federal court and thereby waive the procedural defect discussed above, Plaintiff shall notify the Court in writing on or before 4/11/2017. If Plaintiff instead prefers that this action be remanded to state court, Plaintiff may simply decline to file a waiver of the procedural defect. (Made JS-6 Case Terminated.) (jp)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JS-6

CIVIL MINUTES -- GENERAL
Case No.

ED CV 17-524-JFW (DTBx)

Title:

Carlos V. Farias -v- Quicken Loans, Inc., et al.

Date: April 6, 2017

PRESENT:
HONORABLE JOHN F. WALTER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Shannon Reilly
Courtroom Deputy

None Present
Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFFS:
None
PROCEEDINGS (IN CHAMBERS):

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS:
None

ORDER REMANDING ACTION TO SAN BERNARDINO
COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT;
ORDER STAYING REMAND ORDER UNTIL APRIL 11,
2017

On February 3, 2017, Plaintiff Carlos V. Farias (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint against
Defendant Quicken Loans, Inc. (“Defendant”) and Does 1 through 50 in San Bernardino County
Superior Court. On March 20, 2017, Defendant filed a Notice of Removal of Action Under 28
U.S.C. § 1332 (“Notice of Removal”).
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446, a defendant seeking to remove a case to federal court “shall
file in the district court . . . a notice of removal . . . containing a short and plain statement of the
grounds for removal, together with a copy of all process, pleadings, and orders served upon such
defendant or defendants in such action.” 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a). 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b) provides that
“[t]he notice of removal . . . shall be filed within 30 days after the receipt by the defendant, through
service or otherwise, of a copy of the initial pleading setting forth the claim for relief upon which
such action or proceeding is based.” 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(1). If the initial pleading does not provide
a basis for removal, “a notice of removal may be filed within 30 days after receipt by the defendant,
through service or otherwise, of a copy of an amended pleading, motion, order or other paper from
which it may first be ascertained that the case is one which is or has become removable.” 28
U.S.C. § 1446(b)(3).
Defendant was served with a copy of the Summons and Complaint on February 3, 2017,
and filed its Notice of Removal more than thirty days later on March 20, 2017. Because Defendant
could ascertain that this case was removable based on the allegations of the Complaint,
Defendant’s Notice of Removal was not timely filed. Although Defendants claims that “Plaintiffs
Page 1 of 2

Initials of Deputy Clerk sr

agreed to an extension of time of fifteen days for Quicken Loans to respond to the Complaint until
March 20, 2017,” see Notice of Removal at ¶ 2, the thirty-day period is statutory and is not
extended by a stipulation extending the time to file an answer or otherwise respond to the
Complaint. See, e.g., Ortiz v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 583 F. Supp. 526, 531 (N.D. Ill.
1984); Galea v. Mayer, 2010 WL 2511327, at *2 (C.D. Cal. June 17, 2010); Shukov v. Isostent,
LLC, 2003 WL 1888863, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 14, 2003).
Accordingly, the Court hereby REMANDS this action to San Bernardino County Superior
Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). The Court STAYS this Order until April 11, 2017. Because
Plaintiff originally filed this action in San Bernardino County Superior Court, the Court assumes that
Plaintiff does not object to the remand of this action. However, in the unlikely event Plaintiff wishes
to remain in federal court and thereby waive the procedural defect discussed above, Plaintiff shall
notify the Court in writing on or before April 11, 2017. If Plaintiff instead prefers that this action be
remanded to state court, Plaintiff may simply decline to file a waiver of the procedural defect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Page 2 of 2

Initials of Deputy Clerk sr