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.

Title Louis Taxner v. John G. Stumpf

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


December 29, 2011

TITLE LOUIS TAXNER
v.
JOHN G. STUMPF, ET AL.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable Christina A. Snyder

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL "O"

Present: The Honorable CHRISTINA A. SNYDER

CATHERINE JEANG Not Present N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No. Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants: Not Present Not Present

Proceedings: (In Chambers:) DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO STRIKE (filed 11/4/2011) PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR FINDING OF MOOTNESS

(Filed 12/19/11)

INTRODUCTION

On September 21, 2011, plaintiff Louis Taxner ("plaintiff") filed the instant action against John G. Stumpf, World Savings Bank FSB, Margaret Padilla, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (collectively, "defendants") in Riverside Superior Court. Defendants timely removed to this Court on October 28, 2011, on the basis of federal question jurisdiction, U.S.C. §§ 1441(b) and 1331, because plaintiff's eighth claim alleged violations of Tit. 16, § 433.2 of the Code of Federal Regulations. On November 4, 2011, defendants filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to strike plaintiff's complaint. Plaintiff did not file a timely opposition to defendants' motions. On December 19, 2011, plaintiff filed a styled as a "motion for finding of mootness" based on the fact that he had purportedly filed a first amended complaint ("FAC") in Riverside Superior Court on October 28, 2011.

Plaintiff contends that defendants' motions are moot in light of the FAC and requests that this Court remand the action. See Dkt. No. 14 at 1--2. However, because defendants removed to this Court prior to plaintiff filing the FAC, the state court no longer retains jurisdiction over the matter. See Sugimoto v. Exportadora de Sal, S.A. de C.V., 233 Cal. App. 3d 165, 169 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991) ("Once a matter is removed to the court, a state trial court and its judge have no jurisdiction over the matter. . . ."). Plaintiff's attempt to file the FAC in state court was therefore procedurally improper.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL "O"

Case No. ED CV 11-1721 CAS (PJWx)

Date December 29, 2011

Title LOUIS TAXNER v. JOHN G. STUMPF, ET AL.

Accordingly, the Court GRANTS defendants' motion to dismiss and motion to strike without prejudice. Plaintiff shall have twenty (20) days to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff is directed to file his amended complaint in this Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Initials of Preparer CMJ

20111229

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



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.