Opinion
No. CIV 02-0214-PHX-DKD
June 6, 2002
ORDER
The United States removed this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1444. Thereafter, the United States moved to dismiss the claims against it for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. No opposition has been filed to the United States' motion. Moreover, the Plaintiff filed a "Response to United States Motion to Dismiss" which stated that "Plaintiff does not oppose the Motion." In that same Response Plaintiff requested that the Court dismiss the Federal court action and remand the case to State court.
This case was originally assigned to Magistrate Judge Duncan. In consideration of the fact that not all parties have consented to having this action proceed before a Magistrate Judge, this assignment will be withdrawn pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (c)(6).
The Court will grant the United States' Motion to Dismiss for the good cause demonstrated therein. The exclusive remedy available to a non-taxpayer third party in a "quiet title" action is an action under 28 U.S.C. § 7426. The United States' Motion demonstrates that this exclusive remedy is time-barred in this case. Fidelity Dep. Co. v. City of Adelanto, 87 F.3d 334, 337 (9th Cir. 1996). Given that the United States' presence in this litigation was the sole basis of federal jurisdiction, remand is appropriate following dismissal of the party affording the basis for such jurisdiction. Lee v. City of Beaumont, 12 F.3d 933 937 (9th Cir. 1993); Price v. PSA, Inc., 829 F.2d 871, 876 (9th Cir. 1987).
In accordance with the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED WITHDRAWING the assignment of this case to Magistrate Judge Duncan.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED GRANTING the United States' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 4). All claims of the First Amended Complaint against the United States shall be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED REMANDING this case to the Superior Court of Arizona in and for the County of Pinal (Doc. #6).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED GRANTING Plaintiffs Motion to Accelerate Ruling on Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Remand (Doc. #8).