Federal National Mortage Association v. Portillo

Filing 7


Download PDF
1 2 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 7 FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, a/k/a FANNIE MAE, 8 Plaintiff, 9 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 No. C 12-949 SI ORDER REMANDING CASE TO SUPERIOR COURT FOR COUNTY OF SONOMA v. NICOLAS PORTILLO, et al., Defendants. / 12 13 The Court has reviewed defendant Portillo’s response to the Order to Show Cause Why Case 14 Should Not Be Remanded to State Court for Lack of Jurisdiction. Defendant asserts that this Court has 15 jurisdiction over the unlawful detainer complaint because the complaint originally could have been filed 16 in this Court. Defendant is incorrect. 17 Under the well-pleaded complaint rule, the basis for removal jurisdiction must be evident from 18 the complaint. See Franchise Tax Bd. of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for So. 19 California, 463 U.S. 1, 9-12 (1983). There are no federal claims alleged in the complaint. Where there 20 is no federal question jurisdiction, an action is not removable on the basis of diversity of citizenship if 21 the defendant is a citizen of the state in which the action was brought. See 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a), (b). 22 Here, defendants are California residents, and thus removal was improper. 23 Accordingly, this case is REMANDED to the Superior Court for the County of Sonoma. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 26 27 28 Dated: March 9, 2012 SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge

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?