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 REMANDING CASE FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH 28 U.S.C. § 1446
On June 8, 2011, Plaintiff Deutsche Bank National Trust Company ("Deutsche Bank") filed the present state-law unlawful detainer action against pro se Defendant Jesus Avina, and fictitious defendants in California state court. Mr. Avina removed this action to federal court on November 21, 2011. For the following reasons, the Court, on its own motion, REMANDS this suit to state court because Mr. Avina failed to follow proper removal procedures.
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). However, "[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). The burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction falls on the party seeking removal, and the removal statute is strictly construed against removal jurisdiction. Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992). A federal court can assert subject matter jurisdiction over cases that: (1) involve questions arising under federal law; or (2) are between diverse parties and involve an amount in controversy of over $75,000. 28 U.S.C. § 1331; id. § 1332. To remove an action to federal court, a defendant must file "a copy of all process, pleadings, and orders served upon such defendant . . . in such action." 28 U.S.C. § 1446. Here, Mr. Avina has failed to file a copy of Deutsche Bank's Complaint, despite his acknowledgement in the notice of removal that he received the Complaint. Accordingly, this action is hereby REMANDED to state court for failure to comply with the proper removal procedure.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw ...