From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bartlett v. Patera

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Oct 31, 2018
No. 18-15353 (9th Cir. Oct. 31, 2018)

Opinion

No. 18-15353

10-31-2018

ROY M. BARTLETT, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MARCI PATERA, Defendant-Appellant.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 4:17-cv-06991-HSG MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., District Judge, Presiding Before: SILVERMAN, GRABER, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Defendant-appellant Marci Patera appeals pro se from the district court's order sua sponte remanding plaintiff's action to California state court. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a decision to remand a removed case. Patel v. Del Taco, Inc., 446 F.3d 996, 998 (9th Cir. 2006). We affirm.

The district court properly remanded the action to state court because Patera failed to establish that the state court could not enforce her rights. Contrary to Patera's contentions, Patera has not identified a California statute or constitutional provision that purports to command the state court to ignore her federal civil rights. See id. at 998-99 (two-part test for removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1)).

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Bartlett v. Patera

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Oct 31, 2018
No. 18-15353 (9th Cir. Oct. 31, 2018)
Case details for

Bartlett v. Patera

Case Details

Full title:ROY M. BARTLETT, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MARCI PATERA, Defendant-Appellant.

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Oct 31, 2018

Citations

No. 18-15353 (9th Cir. Oct. 31, 2018)

Citing Cases

Cnty. of Alameda v. Olajide

Olajide has not shown that he has been denied or cannot enforce his federal civil rights in California state…