U.S. Bank National Association v. Bondoc et al

Filing 15

ORDER RE: 5 GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 10/26/10. (rslc3, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/26/2010)

U.S. Bank National Association v. Bondoc et al

Doc. 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

**E-filed 10/26/10**

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, v. Plaintiff, No. C 10-2522 RS ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

MARCELO G. BONDOC, et al., Defendants. ____________________________________/ This action was initiated as an unlawful detainer in the limited jurisdiction division of the Contra Costa Superior Court. Plaintiff seeks possession of real property it purchased at a foreclosure sale. Appearing in pro se, defendants removed the matter to this Court, asserting that plaintiff's claims arise under federal law by virtue of certain Congressional regulation of lending and real estate transactions. Plaintiff moves to remand, contending that the notice of removal notice fails to plead the basis of removal properly and was untimely, and that there is no basis for federal jurisdiction in any event. Defendants filed no opposition to the motion. Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b), this matter is suitable for disposition without oral argument. The motion to remand is granted. It appears defendants may contend that the underlying loan transaction and subsequent foreclosure violated one or more provisions of federal law, but at most such matters would be potential defenses to plaintiff's claim. The complaint for possession

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

under state unlawful detainer statutes does not arise under federal law. Additionally, the notice of removal was filed approximately two months after the complaint was served and one month after defendants filed an answer, and was therefore untimely. Accordingly, there is no basis for jurisdiction in this forum. The action is hereby remanded to Contra Costa Superior Court. Plaintiff's request for attorney fees is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:10/26/10 RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT A HARD COPY OF THIS ORDR WAS MAILED TO: Marcelo G. Bondoc Kathleen Delos Reyes 738 Monarch Court Richmond, CA 94806

DATED: 10/26/10 /s/ Chambers Staff Chambers of Judge Richard Seeborg

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

3