Richards v. World Savings et al
Filing
18
SCHEDULING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Judge Alsup on November 15, 2010. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/15/2010)
Richards v. World Savings et al
Doc. 18
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 GEORGE RICHARDS, Plaintiff, v. WORLD SAVINGS, WACHOVIA MORTGAGE, FSB, WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., GOLDEN WEST, and NDEX WEST, L.L.C., Defendants. / SCHEDULING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE No. C 10-04818 WHA IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
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
Subsequent to the reassignment of this action to the undersigned, defendants noticed their motions to dismiss and to strike for a hearing on February 3, 2011. This order advances the hearing on those motions to DECEMBER 16, 2010, AT 8:00 A.M. Furthermore, defendants removed this action based on an assertion of diversity jurisdiction. The notice of removal states that defendant Golden West is a California corporation but was fraudulently joined and thus should be disregarded for purposes of determining the diversity of the parties. It further states: "the facts establish that Golden West has never had any relationship with plaintiff (contractual or otherwise) and took no part in any of the actions of which plaintiff complains." Yet there is nothing in the record to support this claim. Defendants are therefore ordered to show cause why this action should not be remanded to
Dockets.Justia.com
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
state court, by NOVEMBER 26, 2010, AT NOON. Plaintiff may respond as well regarding jurisdiction, by DECEMBER 2, 2010, AT NOON.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 15, 2010.
WILLIAM ALSUP 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
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?