UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 6, 2011
DP VALUE INVESTMENTS
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Present: The Honorable James V. Selna
Karla J. Tunis Not Present Deputy Clerk Court Reporter Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants:
Not Present Not Present
Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order Remanding Action to Superior Court
On November 4, 2011, Jose Benites ("Benites") removed this case from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Orange.*fn1 (Docket No. 1.) He removed this action on the basis of federal question jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. § 1331. (Notice of Removal, p.2.)
The Court has reviewed the jurisdictional allegations and has considered other possible bases for jurisdiction in light of the facts pled in the Complaint and the Notice of Removal. The Court finds no basis for jurisdiction and now remands the case.
The Court must determine jurisdiction on the basis of the case removed. The underlying action is an unlawful detainer action. No federal claims are asserted (28 U.S.C. § 1331). Federal defenses or federal counterclaims provide no basis to remove an action which does not otherwise establish federal jurisdiction. See Franchise Tax Board
State of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust, 643 U.S. 1, 10 (1983); Metro Truck Sales, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 145 F.3d 320, 326-27 (5th Cir. 1998). There is no basis for federal question jurisdiction.
Neither the Notice of Removal nor the underlying complaint establishes that the parties are diverse, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). In any event, it is apparent that the amount of relief sought is less than the jurisdictional minimum of $75,000. The face of the Complaint states that the amount of claimed damages is less than $10,000. There is no basis for diversity jurisdiction.
The case is remanded to the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Orange for lack of jurisdiction.