Cox v. Aurora Loan Services et al

Filing 38

MEMORANDUM and ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 4/27/2010. With only plaintiff's state law claims, Court ceases to have subject matter jurisdiction and need not address defendants' 28 Motion to Dismiss since those issues are now MOOT. For these reasons, this case is DISMISSED and Clerk directed to close this file. (Marciel, M)

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 v. AURORA LOAN SERVICES; MORTGAGE BANKERS, INC.; QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.; LENDING CAPITAL, INC. DBA LENDING CAPITAL HOME LOANS; PATRICK TOBIN MORAN; JIM A. TOUSIF; PETER DOAN and DOES 120, inclusive, Defendants. ----oo0oo---This action arises out of a mortgage loan transaction in which Plaintiff Robert L. Cox ("Plaintiff") refinanced his home in June 2007. Presently before the Court is a Motion by ROBERT L. COX, Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER No. 2:09-cv-02677-MCE-EFB UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Defendants Aurora Loan Services and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. ("Defendants") to Dismiss the claims alleged against them in Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). 1

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

Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint alleges only state law causes of action. In Plaintiff's Opposition to the Motion to

Dismiss, Plaintiff acknowledges the lack of a federal claim and requests that the Court dismiss the action without prejudice. With only Plaintiff's state law claims remaining, 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 Defendants'

Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 28) as those issues are now moot.1 Plaintiffs are cautioned against filing complaints in this Court and then dismissing the federal claims as soon as a Motion to Dismiss is filed. For the reasons stated above, the case is dismissed. The Clerk is directed to close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: April 27, 2010

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

Because oral argument will not be of material assistance, the Court deemed this matter suitable for decision without oral argument. E.D. Cal. Local Rule 230(g). 2

1