JP Morgan Chase Bank, National Association v. Vu et al

Filing 8

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; SUMMARILY REMANDING TO SANTA CLARA SUPERIOR COURT. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in full and orders as follows: The Court summarily REMANDS the case to Santa C lara County Superior Court. The Clerk of Court shall immediately remand this action to the Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County and close this file. Motions terminated: 4 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Notice of Removal. Signed by Judge James Ware on 6/25/2010. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/25/2010)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 JP Morgan Chase Bank, National Association, v. Plaintiff, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION NO. C 10-02474 JW ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; SUMMARILY REMANDING TO SANTA CLARA SUPERIOR COURT United United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Kim Ha Vu, et al., Defendants. / Presently before the Court is Magistrate Judge Lloyd's Report and Recommendation filed on June 10, 2010. (hereafter, "Report," Docket Item No. 4.) To date, no objections have been filed.1 The duties of the district court in connection with a report and recommendation of a magistrate judge are set forth in Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). Any party may serve and file specific written objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation within ten (10) working days after being served with a copy. See 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Civ. L.R. 72-3. When the parties object to a report and recommendation, the district court "shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); see United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 676 (1980). When no objections are filed, the district court need not review the report and recommendation de novo. The Court notes that mail recently sent to the address provided for Defendants was returned to the Court as undeliverable because the location is vacant. Defendants have not provided the Court with any forwarding address. (See Docket Item Nos. 6, 7.) 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Wang v. Masaitis, 416 F.3d 992, 1000 n.13 (9th Cir. 2005); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121-22 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). A district court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). On February 5, 2010, JPMorgan Chase Bank ("Plaintiff") filed an unlawful detainer action against Kim Ha Vu and Huy Vu ("Defendants") in Santa Clara County Superior Court. (See Report at 1.) On June 4, 2010, Defendants removed the case to federal court asserting federal question jurisdiction. (Id. at 1-2.) With respect to the removal, Judge Lloyd recommends that the Court summarily remand the case to Santa Clara County Superior Court. A district court has original jurisdiction "of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States." 28 U.S.C. 1331. Defenses and counterclaims asserting a federal question do not provide a basis for subject matter jurisdiction. Vaden v. Discover Bank, 129 S. Ct. 1262, 1273 (2009). Here, the Court finds that Plaintiff's Complaint only alleges a state law cause of action for unlawful detainer and does not allege any federal claims. Thus, the Court finds that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this case. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in full and orders as follows: The Court summarily REMANDS the case to Santa Clara County Superior Court. The Clerk of Court shall immediately remand this action to the Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County and close this file. United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Dated: June 25, 2010 JAMES WARE United States District Judge 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO: Kim Ha Vu & Huy Vu 18900 Newsom Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Earl R Wallace Ruzicka and Wallace LLP 16520 Bake Parkway, Suite 280 Irvine, CA 92618 Dated: June 25, 2010 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk By: /s/ JW Chambers Elizabeth Garcia Courtroom Deputy United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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?