Miller v. Wholesale America Mortgage, Inc. et al

Filing 49

ORDER REMANDING CASE. Signed by Judge Jon S. Tigar on May 8, 2013. (wsn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/8/2013)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

MARY MILLER,

Case No. 12-cv-03481-JST

Plaintiff,
8
v.

ORDER REMANDING CASE

9
WHOLESALE AMERICA MORTGAGE,
INC., et al.,

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

Defendants.

12
13

Defendants removed this case to this Court from Marin County Superior Court on the sole

14

ground that Plaintiff asserted causes of action arising under federal law. Notice of Removal, ECF

15

No. 1, at ¶ 3. This Court recently dismissed Plaintiff’s only extant federal cause of action, and

16

noted that the Court would be unlikely to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the case in the

17

absence of a viable federal claim. Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand, and Granting in

18

Part and Denying in Part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss without Prejudice, ECF No. 45. The

19

Court granted Plaintiff leave to amend, but she has not re-asserted her federal claim in her Third

20

Amended Complaint (“TAC”). ECF No. 46. Dismissal is therefore final as to that claim.

21

This is now a case arising solely under California law with a California plaintiff and at

22

least some California defendants. See TAC at ¶¶ 1, 3 & 6. “[I]n the usual case in which all

23

federal-law claims are eliminated before trial, the balance of factors to be considered under the

24

pendent jurisdiction doctrine - judicial economy, convenience, fairness, and comity - will point

25

toward declining to exercise jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims.” Carnegie-Mellon

26

Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343, 350, n.7 (1988). “Needless decisions of state law should be

27

avoided both as a matter of comity and to promote justice between the parties, by procuring for

28

them a surer-footed reading of applicable law.” United Mine Workers of Am. v. Gibbs, 383 U.S.

1

715, 726 (1966). Accordingly, the Court declines to exercise jurisdiction over the remaining

2

claims in this case.

3
4
5
6
7
8

The case is hereby REMANDED to Marin County Superior Court. The Clerk shall close
the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 8, 2013
______________________________________
JON S. TIGAR
United States District Judge

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2