Gerow et al v. Homeq Servicing et al

Filing 46

ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 06/10/10 ORDERING that plfs' proposed Amended Complaint has no federal causes of action alleged, therefore this Court ceases to have subject matter jurisdiction over the suit. The Court DECLINES to exercise its supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state causes of action and they are DISMISSED w/o prejudice. Plf's 38 Motion to Amend is now moot; this case is DISMISSED w/o prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Clerk to close the file. CASE CLOSED (Benson, A.)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. 14 15 16 17 18 19 Defendants. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 This action arises out of a mortgage loan transaction in which Plaintiffs James H. Gerow and Carolyn Figuiera-Gerow ("Plaintiffs") refinanced their home in 2007. Presently before the Court is a Motion by Plaintiffs seeking leave to file a Second Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a). 1 ----oo0oo---HOMEQ SERVICING; EQUIFIRST CORPORATION; T.D. SERVICE COMPANY; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.; UNITED MORTGAGE AND REALTY SOLUTIONS, INC.; BRIANNA WATERS; DAVID MICHAEL RISSE; and DOES 1 through 200, inclusive, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JAMES H. GEROW and CAROLYN FIGUIERA-GEROW, No. 2:09-cv-01659-MCE-GGH UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

In Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs allege violations of both federal and state laws, including the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq. ("TILA") and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C. § 2605 et seq. ("RESPA"). However, in seeking leave to amend, Plaintiffs have

submitted a proposed Amended Complaint in which no federal causes of action are alleged. With only state law claims alleged, this Court ceases to have subject matter jurisdiction over the suit. The Court

declines to exercise its supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state causes of action and they are dismissed without prejudice. The Court need not address the merits of Plaintiffs'

Motion to Amend (Docket No. 38) as those issues are now moot. On the Court's own Motion, this case is hereby dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.1 Clerk is directed to close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: June 10, 2010 The

_____________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Because oral argument will not be of material assistance, the Court orders this matter submitted on the briefs. E.D. Cal. Local Rule 230(g). 2

1