Opinion
Case No. CV 11-7106 ODW (MANx)
11-02-2011
Phillip Paul Naumoff v. Wells Fargo Bank, et al.
cc: order, docket, remand letter to
Superior Court State of CA County of Ventura, 56-02011-00400162
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Present: The Honorable , United States District Judge
Sheila English
Deputy Clerk
Not Present
Court Reporter
n/a
Tape No.
Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s):
Not Present
Attorneys Present for Defendant(s):
Not Present
Proceedings (In Chambers): Order Granting Motion to Remand [14] and Finding Moot Motion to Dismiss [18].
Alleging state law claims arising out of a real estate transaction, Plaintiff brought this action in state court against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and several other Defendants. Wells Fargo removed the action here based on diversity jurisdiction. Plaintiff now moves to remand, arguing, among other things, that although Wells Fargo's main office under its Articles of Association is in South Dakota, its principal place of business is in California, which defeats diversity. After considering the papers filed in support of and in opposition to this motion, the Court deems the matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; L.R. 7-15.
The parties' central disagreement is whether Wells Fargo's citizenship is limited to South Dakota. Courts are divided on the issue. Like other courts in this Circuit, this Court "agrees with Plaintiff[] that the approach of considering a national banking association to be a citizen of both the state in which it has designated its main office and the state where it has its principal place of business is not precluded by the holding in [Wachovia Bank, N.A. v. Schmidt, 546 U.S. 303 (2006)]." Saberi v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg., 2011 WL 197860, *2 (S.D. Cal. 2011); See also Mount v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. CV 08-6298 GAF (MANx), 2008 WL 5046286, at *1-2 (C.D. Cal. Nov.24, 2008).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No. CV 11-7106 ODW (MANx)
Date 11/2/2011
Title Phillip Paul Naumoff v. Wells Fargo Bank, et al.
Supreme Court's holding in Schmidt to mean that a national banking association is a citizen only of the state of its main office, as designated in the Articles of Association. See, e.g., Nguyen v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A, No. C 10-4081(EDL), 2010 WL 4348127, at *4-5 (N.D. Cal. Oct.27, 2010); DeLeon v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. CV 10-1390(JF)(HRL), 2010 WL 2382404, at *2-4 (N.D. Cal. June 9, 2010); Excelsior Funds, Inc. v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 470 F. Supp. 2d 312, 314-22 (S.D. N.Y. 2006).
If anything, the doubt raised by this disagreement itself counsels in favor of remand. See, e.g., Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir.1992) (removal statute is strictly construed and "jurisdiction must be rejected if there is any doubt as to the right of removal in the first instance.").
This Court thus lacks subject matter jurisdiction and hereby orders this action REMANDED. Wells Fargo's motion to dismiss is MOOT. [18]
It bears noting here that Defendants have also failed to meet their burden of demonstrating that First American Loanstar Trustee Services, LLC, a California citizen, is a fraudulently joined nominal Defendant. (See Opp'n at 10-12.)
SO ORDERED
---- : 00
Initials of Preparer SE