Riverwalk Holdings, Ltd. et al

Filing 25

ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS POST-REMAND SUBMISSION. Since this court's involvement is complete, the parties shall not present any additional documents for filing in this case. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 4/10/2013. (ejdlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/10/2013) (Additional attachment(s) added on 4/10/2013: # 1 Certificate of Service) (ecg, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN JOSE DIVISION
CASE NO. 5:12-cv-05748 EJD

RIVERWALK HOLIDINGS, LTD,

11

ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S POSTREMAND SUBMISSION

Plaintiff(s),
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13

v.
[Docket Item No(s). 24]

ANTHONY GUANCIONE, et. al.,

14
Defendant(s).
15
16

/
On January 4, 2013, this court remanded this action to Santa Clara County Superior Court for

17

lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Docket Item No. 21. Nearly three months later, on April 2,

18

2013, Defendant submitted a document to the district court entitled “Notice to Clerk of

19

Disqualification of Edward J. Davila,” which the clerk noted as received, rather than filed, on the

20

court’s docket. See Docket Item No. 24.

21

The purpose of Defendant’s document is unclear. To the extent it was intended as a motion

22

for recusal under 28 U.S.C. §§ 144 or 455, it is unwarranted. New York City Housing Develop.

23

Corp. v. Hart, 796 F.2d 976, 980 (7th Cir. 1986) (“Federal judges are obligated not to recuse

24

themselves where there is no reason to question their impartiality.”). It is also unnecessary since this

25

court no longer retains jurisdiction over this action; the certified remand order issued on January 4,

26

2013, and the state court acknowledged receipt on January 9, 2013. Seedman v. United States Dist.

27

Court, 837 F.2d 413, 414 (9th Cir. 1988) (“Once a district court certifies a remand order to state

28

court it is divested of jurisdiction and can take no further action on the case.”). Accordingly, all
1
CASE NO. 5:12-cv-05748 EJD
ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S POST-REMAND SUBMISSION

1

future filings pertaining to this case should be directed to Santa Clara County Superior Court. See

2

28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) (“A certified copy of the order of remand shall be mailed by the clerk to the

3

clerk of the State court. The State court may thereupon proceed with such case.”).

4

Since this court’s involvement is complete, the parties shall not present any additional

5

documents for filing in this case.

6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8

Dated: April 10, 2013
EDWARD J. DAVILA
United States District Judge

9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
CASE NO. 5:12-cv-05748 EJD
ORDER RE: DEFENDANT’S POST-REMAND SUBMISSION