U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. v. Sandoval et al

Filing 13

ORDER Case Management Statement due by 9/5/2013. Case Management Conference set for 9/12/2013 11:00 AM in Courtroom C, 15th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Laurel Beeler on 6/24/2013. (lblc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/24/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

Northern District of California

10

San Francisco Division
U.S. BANK TRUST N.A., AS TRUSTEE
FOR VOLT ASSET HOLDINGS NPL3,

12
For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

Plaintiff,
13
v.
14
15

ORDER (1) CONTINUING THE
INITIAL CASE MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE AND (2) DIRECTING
PLAINTIFF TO FILE A MOTION TO
REMAND

MARCOS SANDOVAL, CECILIA
ACOSTA, and DOES 1 to 6, inclusive,

16

No. C 13-01304 LB

Defendant.
_____________________________________/

17
18

Defendants Marcos Sandoval and Cecilia Acosta removed this unlawful detainer action from

19

state court to this court on March 22, 2013 and filed for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Notice

20

of Removal, ECF No. 1; Motions for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, ECF Nos. 3 and 4.1

21

Since then, the Defendants have done nothing. See generally Docket. On June 20, 2013, Plaintiff

22

U.S. Bank Trust N.A. (“U.S. Bank”) filed a Case Management Statement arguing that the court

23

lacks jurisdiction over this case and should remand it back to state court. See ECF No. 12. U.S.

24

Bank failed to notice or file a motion, a memorandum of law, or any evidentiary support for that

25

contention. Case Management Statement, ECF No. 12.

26

This court has previously explained to U.S. Bank’s counsel (in very similar circumstances) that

27
28

1

Citations are to the Electronic Case File (“ECF”) with pin cites to the electronic page
number at the top of the documents.
C 13-01304 LB
ORDER

1

if he wants relief for his clients, he must ask for it in the form required by the local rules. See Order,

2

U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Medina-Gonzalez, No. C 12-04991 LB, ECF No. 16. The court has generated a

3

standard order, and it is easy to copy it. Accordingly, if U.S. Bank wants the court to address the

4

issue it raises, the court DIRECTS it to file and serve, in accordance with Civil Local Rule 7, a

5

noticed motion to remand based on a lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

6

Because only U.S. Bank has consented to the undersigned’s jurisdiction, see ECF No. 10, and to

7

allow sufficient time for U.S. Bank to move for the relief it seeks, the court CONTINUES the June

8

27, 2013 initial case management conference to September 12, 2013 at 10:30 a.m. in Courtroom C,

9

15th Floor, United States District Court, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California,

10

12
For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11

94102.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 24, 2013
_______________________________
LAUREL BEELER
United States Magistrate Judge

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

C 13-01304 LB
ORDER

2