The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Cormac J. Carney, United States District Judge
PRESENT: HONORABLE CORMAC J. CARNEY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Michelle Urie N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT:
None Present None Present
PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO REMAND [filed 04/12/12]
Having read and considered the papers presented by the parties, the Court finds this matter appropriate for disposition without a hearing. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; Local Rule 7-15. Accordingly, the hearing set for May 21, 2012at 1:30 p.m. is hereby vacated and off calendar.
I. Introduction and Background
Plaintiff Ryan Greaux moves in propria persona to remand the instant action on the grounds that there is no complete diversity of the parties and all of his claims arise under state law. For the reasons provided below, Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED.
On March 2, 2012, Mr. Greaux filed suit against Defendant Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC ("Ocwen") in Orange County Superior Court for various state claims arising from a dispute over efforts to modify his $385,000 home loan and to avoid foreclosure of his residential property. (Dkt. No. 1, Exh. 1 [Complaint].) On March 13, 2012, Ocwen removed the action to this Court based on diversity jurisdiction. (Dkt. No. 1.) In the Complaint, Mr. Greaux asserted eight causes of action for (1) declaratory relief, (2) unjust enrichment, (3) breach of contract, (4) violation of California's Rosenthal Act, (5) quiet title, (6) injunctive relief, (7) violation of Cal. Civ. Code § 2923.5, and (8) violation of Cal. Civ. Code § 2923.6. Mr. Greaux filed the operative First Amended Complaint ("FAC") on April 11, 2012. (Dkt. No. 6.) In the FAC, Mr. Greaux asserts four claims for negligence, negligent misrepresentation, declaratory relief, and violations of Cal. Civ. Code §§ 2923.5 and 2923.6. Mr. Greaux requests, inter alia, declaratory and injunctive relief as well as compensatory damages. On April 12, 2012, Mr. Greaux filed the instant motion to remand. (Dkt. No. 8.) Ocwen opposed the motion. (Dkt. No. 13.) Mr. Greaux did not file a reply.
A civil action brought in a state court, but over which a federal court may exercise original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant to a federal district court. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). "A suit may be removed to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) only if it could have been brought there originally." Sullivan v. First Affiliated Sec., Inc., 813 F.2d 1368, 1371 (9th Cir. 1987); Infuturia Global Ltd. v. Sequus Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 631 F.3d 1133, 1135 n.1 (9th Cir. 2011) ("[A] federal court must have both removal and subject matter jurisdiction to hear a case removed from state court."). Removal jurisdiction must be determined from the "four corners" of the complaint as it existed at the time of removal. See Harris v. Bankers Life and Cas. Co., 425 F.3d 689, 694 (9th Cir. 2005). The burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction falls on the party seeking removal, and the ...