Guldbeck et al v. BNC Mortgage, Inc. et al

Filing 32

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE why case should not be remanded. Show Cause Response due by 4/9/2010. (vrwlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/31/2010)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Defendants removed the above-captioned case from San Mateo County superior court on December 7, 2009, asserting the court had jurisdiction pursuant to 28 USC § 1331. Doc #1. ALEX GULDBECK and KIMBERLY A ANDERSON, Plaintiffs, v CHASE HOME FINANCE, LLC; FIRST AMERICAN LOANSTAR TRUSTEE SERVICES, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INC; VORHEES VENTURES INC and DOES 1-100, Defendants. / No C 09-5733 VRW ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Defendants then moved to dismiss the complaint, and the court granted the motion with leave to amend. an amended complaint on March 22, 2010. Doc #27. Doc #31. Plaintiffs filed The amended

complaint contains no federal claims, and the parties do not appear to be diverse. While the court had jurisdiction over the case when

it was removed, the federal jurisdictional hook was eliminated when

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

plaintiffs failed to assert any federal claims in the amended complaint. The court may, in its discretion, remand a matter if all federal claims have been dismissed. 28 USC § 1367(c)(3); see also

Wren v Sletten Construction Co, 654 F2d 529, 536 (9th Cir 1981) ("When the state issues apparently predominate and all federal claims are dismissed before trial, the proper exercise of discretion requires dismissal of the state claims."). The parties

are therefore ORDERED to SHOW CAUSE in writing not later than April 9, 2010 why the matter should not be remanded to San Mateo County superior court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

VAUGHN R WALKER United States District Chief Judge

2