Navarro v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc., et al

Filing 7

ORDER to SHOW CAUSE signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/23/10 ORDERING that Navarro shall show cause, in writing, by 12/08/10, why this action should not be remanded to state court due to his failure to file a copy of the state court c omplaint, and as a result, his failure to establish that this court has subject matter jurisdiction over the action. By 12/08/10, Navarro shall also file a copy of all of the pleadings, process and orders that were served on him in the state action and shall inform the court whether the notice of removal was served on the state court plaintiffs, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d). Failure of Navarro to file a response to the order to show cause or to otherwise comply with this order may result in a recommendation that this action be remanded to Sacramento County Superior Court. (Benson, A.)

Download PDF
(PS) Navarro v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc., et al Doc. 7 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 vs. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC.; BANK OF AMERICA HOME LOANS; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.; and DOES 1 through 50; Defendants. _________________________________/ This case, in which plaintiff is proceeding pro se, is before the undersigned pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 302(c)(21). See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). On October 21, 2010, Navarro removed the action to this court from Sacramento County Superior Court;1 on October 21, 2010, Navarro filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis; and on November 1, 2010, Navarro filed a motion for a temporary restraining order. Dckt. Nos. 1, 2, 3. //// Although the notice of removal states that Navarro is the "plaintiff" in this action, Navarro states in the notice of removal that the purported "defendants" filed a state law complaint against Navarro, which would indicate that Navarro is actually the defendant in this action. Dckt. No. 1. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SANTIAGO L. NAVARRO, Plaintiff, No. CIV S-10-2848 JAM EFB PS ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 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 On November 2, 2010, the undersigned issued an order requiring Navarro to (1) show cause why this action should not be remanded to state court due to his failure to file a copy of the state court complaint, and as a result, his failure to establish that this court has subject matter jurisdiction over the action; and (2) file a copy of all of the pleadings, process and orders that were served on him in the state action and inform the court whether the notice of removal was served on the state court plaintiffs, as required by 28 U.S.C. 1446(d).2 Dckt. No. 5. On November 17, 2010, Navarro filed a response to the order to show cause, stating that the removal was proper and including a copy of a deed of trust and a substitution of trustee. Dckt. No. 6. However, because Navarro has once again failed to file a copy of the state court complaint, the undersigned cannot determine whether this court has subject matter jurisdiction over the action. See 28 U.S.C. 1447(c) ("If at any time before final judgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded."). Navarro also failed to file any of the "pleadings, process and orders that were served on him in the state action" and failed to inform the court whether the notice of removal was served on the state court plaintiffs, as required by 28 U.S.C. 1446(d). See 28 U.S.C. 1446(a) (providing that removing defendants "shall file in the district court of the United States for the district and division within which such action is pending a notice of removal . . . , together with a copy of all process, pleadings, and orders served upon such defendant or defendants in such action."); 1446(d) ("Promptly after the filing of such notice of removal of a civil action the defendant or defendants shall give written notice thereof to all adverse parties and shall file a copy of the notice with the clerk of such State court, which shall effect the removal and the State court shall proceed no further unless and until the case is remanded."). Accordingly, Navarro will once again be ordered to show cause why this action should not be remanded to state court due to his failure to file a copy of all of the pleadings, process and The order also deferred ruling on Navarro's request to proceed in forma pauperis and motion for a temporary restraining order in light of the removal defects. Dckt. No. 5 at 1-2, n.2. 2 2 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 orders that were served on him in the state action, and as a result, his failure to establish that this court has subject matter jurisdiction over the action. Navarro will also once again be ordered to file a copy all of the pleadings, process and orders that were served on him in the state action and to inform the court whether the notice of removal was served on the state court plaintiffs, as required by 28 U.S.C. 1446(d). A failure to comply with this order may result in a recommendation that this action be remanded to Sacramento County Superior Court. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Navarro shall show cause, in writing, no later than December 8, 2010, why this action should not be remanded to state court due to his failure to file a copy of the state court complaint, and as a result, his failure to establish that this court has subject matter jurisdiction over the action. 2. On or before December 8, 2010, Navarro shall also file a copy of all of the pleadings, process and orders that were served on him in the state action and shall inform the court whether the notice of removal was served on the state court plaintiffs, as required by 28 U.S.C. 1446(d). 3. Failure of Navarro to file a response to the order to show cause or to otherwise comply with this order may result in a recommendation that this action be remanded to Sacramento County Superior Court. SO ORDERED. DATED: November 23, 2010. 3

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?