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.

Grand River Investment L.L.C v. Ramos

United States District Court, Central District of California

December 9, 2014

Grand River Investment L.L.C.
v.
Lupe Ramos

IN CHAMBERS – ORDER REMANDING ACTION TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

HONORABLE DOLLY M. GEE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

On or about July 17, 2014, Plaintiff Grand River Investment L.L.C. and/or its successors and/or assignees in interest (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint (“Compl.”) in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, Pasadena Courthouse, against Defendant Lupe Ramos. Plaintiff’s Complaint seeks judgment against Ramos for possession of certain real property located in South El Monte, CA (the “Property”). Compl. ¶ 5. The Complaint alleges a single cause of action for unlawful detainer and seeks restitution and possession of the Property, daily rental value damages for the period of June 10, 2014 through the date of entry of judgment, costs of the suit incurred herein, and other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper. Compl. at p. 4.

Defendant Ramos filed a Notice of Removal to federal court on October 14, 2014, asserting federal question jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Ramos asserts that “Plaintiff’s claim is based upon a notice which expressly references and incorporates the ‘Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009, ยง 12 U.S.C. § 5201.” Notice of Removal at 2. Plaintiff’s Complaint does not make any reference to 12 U.S.C. § 5201, which is a law that provides certain protections to tenants facing eviction. If section 5201 has any relevance whatsoever to this action, it is as the basis for an affirmative defense. It is axiomatic, however, that federal jurisdiction cannot rest upon an actual or anticipated defense. See Vaden v. Discover Bank, 556 U.S. 49, 129 S.Ct. 1262, 1272, 173 L.Ed.2d 206 (2009).

As Ramos has not established a basis for federal question jurisdiction, this action is hereby REMANDED to the Los Angeles County Superior Court, Pasadena branch, where it was originally filed. The scheduling conference on December 12, 2014 is hereby VACATED

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.