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.

Raymond Wang v. Sunday Akinbayode

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 25, 2012

RAYMOND WANG
v.
SUNDAY AKINBAYODE, ET AL.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable George H. King, U. S. District Judge

E-Filed - JS-6

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Presiding: The Honorable GEORGE H. KING, U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Beatrice Herrera N/A N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendant:

None None

Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order Remanding Case

On April 9, 2012, we issued an Order directing Defendant Sunday Akinbayode ("Defendant") to show cause ("OSC") within fourteen days why the above-captioned unlawful detainer action should not be remanded to state court based on this Court's lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We noted that Defendant's Notice of Removal ("NOR") stated that we have federal question jurisdiction but that on its face, the operative state court Complaint only alleges a claim for unlawful detainer under California law. We also noted that while Defendant appears to argue that we have subject matter jurisdiction predicated on a defense under the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act ("PTFA"), federal jurisdiction cannot rest upon an actual or anticipated defense or counterclaim. We cautioned Defendant that failure to timely respond to our OSC would be deemed Defendant's admission that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.

On April 23, 2012, Defendant filed a Response to our OSC. Defendant's Response sets forth no federal questions presented by the Complaint, instead summarily stating: "The complaint presents federal questions. . . . Plaintiff [sic] has shown (a) that jurisdiction is provided for by statute or (b) the issues raised by Defendant present substantial constitutional questions effecting [sic] the Defendant as to his rights, privileges and immunities contained within the Constitution. Thus Defendant has shown cause why his Removal action should not be remanded to state court for lack of jurisdiction as jurisdiction is established . . . ." (Response 2-3).

The party seeking to establish jurisdiction bears the burden of proving such. Kokkonen, 511 U.S. at 377. Because Defendant's Response does not identify a single federal claim or issue raised by the Complaint, Defendant has failed to meet his burden of proving federal jurisdiction over this action and failed to show cause why this action should not be remanded. Accordingly, this case is hereby REMANDED to the state court from which it was removed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

E-Filed - JS-6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. ED CV 12-450-GHK (SPx)

Date April 25, 2012

Raymond Wang v. Sunday Akinbayode, et al.

Initials of Deputy Clerk Bea

20120425

© 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.