Banaga v. Taylor Bean Mortgage, Co. et al

Filing 33

ORDER RE: FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley on 9/29/2011. (ahm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/29/2011)

Download PDF
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 16 No. C11-4007 JSC KIMBERLY BANAGA; GERARD BANAGA, ORDER RE: FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION Plaintiffs, v. TAYLOR BEAN MORTGAGE, CO. et al., Defendants. / 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Now pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a first amended complaint. As stated on the record at the hearing on September 29, 2011, Plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED. The Court will consider Defendants’ motion to dismiss as if directed to the amended complaint. In doing so, to the extent appropriate the Court will consider the allegations made in the original complaint. The amended complaint, however, only states claims against a single defendant: Cenlar F.S.B. Defendants properly removed this case to this federal court on the ground that Freddie Mac was a defendant. Since, as of the date of this Order, Freddie Mac is no longer a defendant, Defendants are directed to show cause as to why this Court can and should retain jurisdiction of this action. Defendants shall file their response on or before October 5, 2011. Plaintiff shall file any response on or before October 11, 2011. The Court will take the 1 matter of jurisdiction and Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss under submission at that time. 2 3 IT IS SO ORDERED. 4 5 Dated: September 29, 2011 6 JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 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?