From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

HSBC Bank USA, NA v. King

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 3, 2011
Case No. CV 11-08755 DMG (PLAx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. CV 11-08755 DMG (PLAx)

11-03-2011

HSBC Bank USA, National Association v. Sharon King, et al.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s) None Present Attorneys Present for Defendant(s) None Present


CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Present: The Honorable DOLLY M. GEE , UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

VALENCIA VALLERY

Deputy Clerk

NOT REPORTED

Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s)

None Present

Attorneys Present for Defendant(s)

None Present

Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS—ORDER REMANDING ACTION TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

On October 13, 2011, Plaintiff HSBC Bank USA, National Association filed a complaint in Los Angeles County Superior Court for unlawful detainer against Defendant Sharon King and Does 1 through 5. Plaintiff seeks possession of real property and restitution for Defendant's use and occupancy of the property in the amount of $80 per day starting on October 7, 2011. (Compl. at 2-3.) Defendant removed the case to this Court on October 26, 2011, asserting subject matter jurisdiction on the basis of a federal question, 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

"The burden of establishing federal subject matter jurisdiction falls on the party invoking removal." Marin Gen. Hosp. v. Modesto & Empire Traction Co., 581 F.3d 941, 944 (9th Cir. 2009) (citing Toumajian v. Frailey, 135 F.3d 648, 652 (9th Cir. 1998)). There is a "strong presumption against removal jurisdiction," and courts must reject it "if there is any doubt as to the right of removal in the first instance." Geographic Expeditions, Inc. v. Estate of Lhotka ex rel. Lhotka, 599 F.3d 1102, 1107 (9th Cir. 2010) (quoting Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992) (per curiam)) (internal quotation marks omitted).

The complaint raises no federal question. Federal jurisdiction cannot rest upon an actual or anticipated defense or counterclaim. Vaden v. Discover Bank, __ U.S. __, 129 S.Ct. 1262, 1272, 173 L.Ed.2d 206 (2009). Nor does the complaint reveal a basis for diversity jurisdiction. The amount in controversy is well below the $75,000 jurisdictional threshold for diversity jurisdiction. The caption of the underlying state court complaint clearly states that the amount of damages sought by Plaintiff does not exceed $10,000.

As Defendant has not established a basis for subject matter jurisdiction, this action is hereby REMANDED to Los Angeles County Superior Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

HSBC Bank USA, NA v. King

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Nov 3, 2011
Case No. CV 11-08755 DMG (PLAx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2011)
Case details for

HSBC Bank USA, NA v. King

Case Details

Full title:HSBC Bank USA, National Association v. Sharon King, et al.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Nov 3, 2011

Citations

Case No. CV 11-08755 DMG (PLAx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 3, 2011)