The Bank of New York Mellon v. Davidson et al

Filing 68

ORDER ADOPTING 58 Findings and Recommendations and REMANDING CASE for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 6/18/2021. Certified copy of remand order sent to other court. CASE CLOSED. (Marrujo, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON,

12
13
14
15
16

No. 1:17-cv-01335-DAD-EPG

Plaintiff,
v.
BRENDA L. DAVIDSON, et al.,

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS AND REMANDING
CASE FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER
JURISDICTION

Defendants.
(Doc. No. 58)

17
18

Plaintiff Bank of New York Mellon commenced this action by filing suit in the Superior

19

Court of the State of California, County of Tulare on August 7, 2017. (Doc No. 1-1 at 6.) The

20

United States, then a defendant, removed the action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1442(a)(1) and 1444 on

21

October 4, 2017. (Doc. No. 1.) The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge

22

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

23

On April 2, 2019, plaintiff and defendant United States filed a stipulation concerning the

24

priority of the United States’ lien. (Doc. No. 26.) On August 15, 2019, the court granted the

25

stipulation and terminated the United States from this action. (Doc. No. 38 at 16.)

26

On May 7, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations,

27

recommending that this matter be remanded back to state court because the United States was no

28

longer a party and there was no other basis for federal jurisdiction. (Doc. No. 58.) The findings
1

1

and recommendations were served on the parties and contained noticed that any objections

2

thereto were to be filed within fourteen days after service. (Id. at 6.) No party has filed any

3

objections, and the time to do so has expired.

4

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this

5

court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the

6

court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and proper analysis.

7

Accordingly,

8

1. The findings and recommendations issued on May 7, 2021 (Doc. No. 58) are adopted

9
10

in full;
2. This matter is remanded to the Superior Court of California, County of Tulare for lack

11
12
13
14

of subject-matter jurisdiction; and
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

June 18, 2021
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2