Opinion
Case No. CV-13-709-R
02-04-2013
FANNIE MAE etc v. MARY L. ROBERSON
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFFS: None ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS: None
MAKE JS-6
CIVIL MINUTES -- GENERAL
PRESENT: HONORABLE MANUEL L. REAL, JUDGE
+-------------------------------+ ¦William Horrell ¦None Present ¦ +----------------+--------------¦ ¦Courtroom Deputy¦Court Reporter¦ +-------------------------------+
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFFS:
None
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS:
None PROCEEDINGS: MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) SUA SPONTE REMANDING ACTION TO STATE COURT
A district court must remand a case to state court "if at any time before final judgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction." 28 U.S.C. 1447(c). Because this is an unlawful detainer action, a federal question does not present itself. See Indymac Federal Bank, F.S.B. v. Ocampo, No. CV 09-2337, 2010 WL 234828, *2 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 13, 2010) (sua sponte remanding an action to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction where plaintiff's complaint contained only an unlawful detainer claim). As such, this case is now REMANDED TO STATE COURT. This case was also improperly removed on its face, as the person listed as the removing party in propria persona as Harold Roberson, is not a named defendant in the underlying state action. However, if the removing party had been Mary L. Roberson, the matter would still be remanded for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as explained above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
cc: counsel of record MINUTES FORM 11
CIVIL -- GEN
Initials of Deputy Clerk __ WH ___