BankUnited v. Peters
ORDER re 3 MOTION to Remand filed by BankUnited. Signed by Judge Hamilton on 5/13/2011. (pjhlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/13/2011) (Additional attachment(s) added on 5/13/2011: # 1 Certificate of Service) (nah, COURT STAFF).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. C 11-1756 PJH
For the Northern District of California
United States District Court
Defendant Damian Peters removed this unlawful detainer action from the Superior
Court of California, County of Sonoma, on April 8, 2011, alleging diversity jurisdiction.
Plaintiff BankUnited seeks an order remanding the case, arguing that defendant has not
met his burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction.
In ruling on a motion to remand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, the court looks
to the face of the complaint. See Toumajian v. Frailey, 135 F.3d 648, 653 n.2 (9th Cir.
1998); see also Harris v. Bankers Life and Cas. Co., 425 F.3d 689, 692-93 (9th Cir. 2005).
Here, however, while plaintiff makes certain representations in its motion regarding the
state court complaint, no copy of the complaint has been presented to the court.
Ordinarily, it is the responsibility of the defendant to attach a copy of the complaint to
the notice of removal. 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a). However, in view of defendant’s pro se status,
the court will require counsel for BankUnited to submit a declaration attaching a copy of the
complaint that initiated this action. Counsel shall file the declaration no later than May 18,
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 13, 2011
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
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?