Pantoja v. BAC Home Servicing, LP et al

Filing 26

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Show Cause Response due by 12/21/2011.. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 12/7/11. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/8/2011)

Download PDF
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 OAKLAND DIVISION 5 6 DEMETRIO PANTOJA, Plaintiff, 7 8 Case No: C 11-2946 SBA ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE vs. 9 BAC HOME SERVICING, LP FKA COUNTRY WIDE HOME LOANS 10 SERVICING LP, organized and existing under the laws of New York, 11 RECONSTRUST COMPANY, N.A., is organized and exists under the law of the State 12 of Texas, 13 Defendants. 14 15 Plaintiff filed the instant pro se action in this Court on June 15, 2011, seeking to 16 challenge the anticipated foreclosure of his home located at 1857 Letterkenny Drive, 17 Lincoln, California. Compl. ¶ 24. As Defendants, Plaintiff has named BAC Home Loans 18 Servicing LP and Recontrust Company, N.A. Plaintiff alleges that the Court has 19 jurisdiction based on the diversity of the parties. Id. ¶ 1. 20 21 22 23 24 25 The federal venue statute provides: A civil action wherein jurisdiction is founded only on diversity of citizenship may, except as otherwise provided by law, be brought only in (1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same State, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) a judicial district in which any defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction at the time the action is commenced, if there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought. 26 27 28 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a). Here, Plaintiff alleges that instant action arises from a dispute concerning his property, which is located in Lincoln, California. Lincoln is located in 1 Placer County, which lies in the Eastern District of California. E.D. Civ. L.R. 120. In 2 addition, there appears to be no nexus between the parties and this District. As such, it 3 appears that venue is proper in the Eastern District of California, not the Northern District 4 of California. Accordingly, 5 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the parties shall show cause why the instant 6 action should not be transferred to the Eastern District of California, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 7 § 1404(a) or § 1406(a). The parties shall submit a written response to this Order, not to 8 exceed five pages, by no later than December 21, 2011. If no response to this Order is 9 received by the deadline, the Court will presume that venue is improper and/or 10 inconvenient in this District, and that the parties have no objection to the transfer of venue 11 to the Eastern District of California. The hearing on Defendants’ pending motions 12 scheduled for December 13, 2011 is VACATED pending further order of the Court. 13 14 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: December 7, 2011 _______________________________ SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- 1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 PANTOJA et al, 4 Plaintiff, 5 v. 6 BAC HOME SERVICING, LP et al, 7 Defendant. / 8 9 Case Number: CV11-02946 SBA 10 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 11 12 I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. 13 14 15 That on December 8, 2011, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. 16 17 18 Demetrio P. Pantoja 1857 Letterkenny Drive Lincoln, CA 95648 19 20 Dated: December 8, 2011 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk 21 By: LISA R CLARK, Deputy Clerk 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3-

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?