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)

Download PDF
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

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?