Paed et al v. Countrywide Bank NA et al

Filing 43

ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting 42 Motion Requesting Clarification. (crblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/18/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15

No. C 11-03603 CRB

GENARO Q.PAED, at al.,

ORDER RE CLARIFICATION

Plaintiffs,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA, et al.,
Defendants.

/

16
17

On December 19, 2011, the Court remanded this case to state court, explaining that the

18

second amended complaint (dkt. 38) no longer contained any federal claims. See Order (dkt. 40).

19

Defendants request clarification of the Court’s Order, noting that, though the second amended

20

complaint did not contain any federal claims, it purported to incorporate the first amended

21

complaint, which did include federal claims. See Mot. (dkt. 42) at 1.

22

Civil Local Rule 10-1 provides that amended pleadings “must reproduce the entire proposed

23

pleading and may not incorporate any part of a prior pleading by reference.” Therefore, the second

24

amended complaint did not contain any federal claims, and the Court lacked jurisdiction.

25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

26
27

Dated: January 18, 2012

28

G:\CRBALL\2011\3603\order re clarification.wpd

CHARLES R. BREYER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE