Safley vs Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Filing 15

REMANDING ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr., on 4/24/13 ORDERING that since both Plaintiffs and Wells Fargo are citizens of California, the Court is without subject matter jurisdiction, and this case is remanded to the Superior Court of the State of California in the County of Sacramento from which it was removed. Certified copy of remand order sent to other court. CASE CLOSED (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

NORMAN SAFLEY, SUZANNE SAFLEY,
Plaintiffs,

9
v.

10

13

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., as
successor in interest to
WACHOVIA MORTGAGE and WORLD
SAVINGS, FSB; DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive,

14

Defendants.
________________________________

11
12

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

2:13-cv-00448-GEB-CKD
REMAND ORDER*

15
16

Wells Fargo removed this case from the Superior Court of the

17

State of California in the County of Sacramento, asserting federal

18

subject matter jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship under 28

19

U.S.C. § 1332. (ECF No. 1.) Wells Fargo states in its Notice of Removal

20

that Plaintiffs “are citizens of California, based on domicile” and that

21

Wells Fargo is a citizen of South Dakota. (Id.) However, this argument,

22

and the other arguments Wells Fargo makes in support of its removal,

23

(ECF Nos. 1, 13), are unpersuasive in light of the exhaustive analysis

24

of the same issues in Taheny v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 878 F. Supp. 2d

25

1093 (E.D. Cal. 2012), which this Court finds persuasive and has

26

previously adopted. See Gosal v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 2:12-cv-

27
28

*

argument.

This matter is deemed suitable for decision without oral
E.D. Cal. R. 230(g).
1

1

02024-GEB-CKD, 2012 WL 4961696, at *1—2 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 15, 2012)

2

(Burrell, J.) (following Taheny and holding that Wells Fargo is a

3

citizen of South Dakota as well as California); see also, e.g., Morgan

4

v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 2:13-cv-00524-GEB-AC, at *1—2 (E.D. Cal.

5

Mar. 27, 2013) (Burrell, J.) (same); Smith v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.,

6

No. 2:12-cv-02355-GEB-DAD, 2012 WL 5386362, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1,

7

2012) (same).

8

Since

both

Plaintiffs

and

Wells

Fargo

are

citizens

of

9

California, the Court is without subject matter jurisdiction, and this

10

case is remanded to the Superior Court of the State of California in the

11

County of Sacramento from which it was removed.

12

Dated:

April 24, 2013

13
14
15

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.
Senior United States District Judge

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