Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Dosanjh v. Litton Loan Servicing

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 22, 2010

BALJIT DOSANJH, SUKHINDER DOSANJH, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
LITTON LOAN SERVICING; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; QUALITY LOAN SERVICE, CORP., AND DOES 1-50 INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.

ORDER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS AND REMAND ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.'s ("Defendant's") Motion to Dismiss, (Doc #29), Plaintiffs Baljit Dosanjh and Sukhinder Dosanjh's ("Plaintiffs'") Second Amended Complaint (Doc. #24) for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).*fn1 Plaintiffs oppose the motion.*fn2 The Court has taken Judicial Notice of all documents as requested by Defendants.

This case was removed from state court to federal court on the basis of federal question jurisdiction. Plaintiffs' original complaint brought claims for relief for violation of the federal Truth in Lending Act ("TILA") and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ("RESPA"), along with supplemental state law claims. Plaintiffs have since amended their complaint twice, and it no longer contains any federal claims for relief. Federal claims for relief are named in the caption and the opening paragraph of the Complaint, but are not set forth as individual claims for relief in the body of the Complaint.

"Subject to the conditions set forth in 28 U.S.C. §1367(c), district courts may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state law claims... In the usual case in which federal law claims are eliminated before trial, the balance of factors will point toward declining to exercise jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims." Keen v. American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., 2010 WL 624306, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 18, 2010) (internal citations omitted). Accordingly, because no federal claims remain in this action, the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims.

ORDER

For the reasons set forth above, the Court declines to exercise jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims. This case is hereby remanded to the Superior Court in and for the County of Sacramento.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.