Opinion
Case No. 18-cv-04955-HSG
11-30-2018
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, Plaintiff, v. RONALD BOYEDE OLAJIDE, Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND
Re: Dkt. No. 8
Plaintiff County of Alameda ("Plaintiff" or "Alameda County") brings this motion to remand this case to Alameda County Superior Court. See Dkt. No. 8. Because there is no basis for this Court to exercise jurisdiction, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion and remands the case.
The Court finds this matter appropriate for disposition without oral argument and the matter is deemed submitted. See Civil L.R. 7-1(b). --------
The events leading up to this case began on April 11, 2018, when Defendant Ronald Boyede Olajide ("Defendant" or "Olajide") recorded a claim for a mechanics lien in the amount of $2.5 billion on property owned by Alameda County. See Notice of Removal, Dkt. No. 1, Ex. A (page 11 in ECF numbering); see also Notice of Removal ¶¶ 3-4. Alameda County filed a petition for release of property from lien in state court on May 21. See Notice of Removal, Ex. C (page 13 in ECF numbering). Olajide removed the case to this Court on August 15, claiming jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1). See Notice of Removal ¶ 7.
A defendant may remove a state civil action to federal court when he "is denied or cannot enforce in the courts of such State a right under any law providing for the equal civil rights of citizens of the United States, or of all persons within the jurisdiction thereof." 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1). A petition for removal under § 1443(1) must satisfy the two-part test articulated by the Supreme Court in Georgia v. Rachel, 384 U.S. 780, 788-92, 794-804 (1966) and City of Greenwood v. Peacock, 384 U.S. 808, 824-28 (1966). See Patel v. Del Taco, Inc., 446 F.3d 996, 998-99 (9th Cir. 2006). "First, the petitioners must assert . . . rights that are given to them by explicit statutory enactment protecting equal racial civil rights." California v. Sandoval, 434 F.2d 635, 636 (9th Cir. 1970). "Second, petitioners must assert that the state courts will not enforce that right, and that allegation must be supported by reference to a state statute or a constitutional provision that purports to command the state courts to ignore the federal rights." Id.
Olajide has not shown that he has been denied or cannot enforce his federal civil rights in California state court. He has failed to "identif[y] a California statute or constitutional provision that purports to command the state court to ignore [his] federal civil rights." See Bartlett v. Patera, 741 F. App'x 511, 511 (9th Cir. 2018). And his allegations that he will be unable to enforce his rights in state court, see Notice of Removal ¶¶ 9-13, are insufficient to support removal. See City of Greenwood, 384 U.S. at 827.
Because there is no basis for federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1), the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion to remand. In addition, because this Court does not have jurisdiction, the Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate Defendant's motions to dismiss and for leave to file a counterclaim, see Dkt. No. 11, and Plaintiff's motion to dismiss Defendant's counterclaims, see Dkt. No. 16, and to remand this case to Alameda County Superior Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 11/30/2018
/s/_________
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.
United States District Judge