Priestley et al v. Priestley

Filing 10

ORDER of Remand to the District Court of Cleveland County, Case No. CJ-2013-1044. Signed by Honorable Timothy D. DeGiusti on 12/20/2016. (mb)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA PATRICK PRIESTLEY, et al., Plaintiffs, v. JOHN J. PRIESTLEY, JR., an individual, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. CIV-16-1234-D ORDER OF REMAND Before the Court is Plaintiff Patrick Priestley’s Objection to Notice of Removal and Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice [Doc. No. 7]. Because Defendant has filed no response within the period prescribed by LCvR7.1(g), the Court deems the allegations in Plaintiff’s motion confessed, and hereby grants the motion. See id. (“Any motion that is not opposed within 21 days may, in the discretion of the court, be deemed confessed.”); Calvey v. Obama, 792 F.Supp.2d 1262, 1273 (W.D. Okla. 2011) (“[A] respondent must address any and all issues raised by a moving party’s papers, or else face the very real possibility that it will be deemed to have abandoned its right to do so.”) (quoting United States v. Nacchio, 555 F.3d 1234, 1251 (10th Cir. 2009)). Moreover, the Court finds the arguments in Plaintiff’s motion and brief regarding the deficiencies of Defendant’s Notice of Removal [Doc. No. 1] to be well taken, and finds the notice fails to present a federal question. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) (“If at any time before final judgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded.”). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Objection to Notice of Removal and Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice [Doc. No. 7] is GRANTED as set forth herein. The present action is hereby REMANDED to the District Court of Cleveland County, Oklahoma, Case No. CJ-2013-1044. IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of December, 2016. 2

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?