Opinion
No. CV 11-596-PHX-JAT.
April 6, 2011
ORDER
Defendant John Doe Occupant 1, whose real name is John Moreau, ("Moreau") removed this case to Federal Court. Moreau alleges that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction based on a federal question. Specifically, Moreau alleges that jurisdiction is based on his claims of protection under the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009. (Doc. 1 at 1).
Typically, jurisdiction must be based on the allegations of the complaint. See Takeda v. Northwestern Nat. Life Ins. Co., 765 F.2d 815, n. 9 (9th Cir. 1985) ("[U]nder the present statutory scheme as it has existed since 1887, a defendant may not remove a case to federal court unless the plaintiff's complaint establishes that the case `arises under' federal law.") (quoting Franchise Tax Board v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. 1, 10 (1983)).
Accordingly, Defendant Moreau, as the party asserting jurisdiction, must file an amended notice of removal properly alleging federal subject matter jurisdiction. Moreau must show either that jurisdiction arises from Plaintiff's complaint, or that the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009 specifically allows federal subject matter jurisdiction to be based on a defense or counterclaim (whichever way Moreau intends to "claim" the protections of the act). Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED that within 15 days of the date of this Order, Moreau shall file an amended notice of removal properly alleging federal subject matter jurisdiction or this case will be remanded for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.