Opinion
21-cv-03768-JSC
07-01-2021
BRECKENRIDGE PROPERTY FUND 2016, LLC, Plaintiff, v. DIANE OHLSSON, Defendant.
ORDER RE: MOTION TO REMAND
Re: Dkt. Nos. 4, 11
JACQUELINE SCOTT CORLE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion to remand. (Dkt. No. 4.) Defendant, who is proceeding without representation by a lawyer, also seeks remand. (Dkt. No. 11.) She avers that she previously filed notice of removal “according to the best of my knowledge and informed belief at that time, ” but “due to new information and better understanding of [] available defenses” requests remand to state court. (Id. at 3.)
All parties have consented to the jurisdiction of a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). (Dkt. Nos. 5, 9.)
Record citations are to material in the Electronic Case File (“ECF”); pinpoint citations are to the ECF-generated page numbers at the top of the documents.
The party seeking removal has the burden to establish that removal is proper, and the Court resolves all uncertainty in favor of remand. Hunter v. Philip Morris USA, 582 F.3d 1039, 1042 (9th Cir. 2009); Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992). Defendant has declined to meet her burden, and her position appears to have changed in good faith. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion to remand and VACATES the hearing set for July 8, 2021. This action is remanded to the Superior Court for the County of Alameda.
This Order disposes of Docket Nos. 4, 11.
IT IS SO ORDERED.