511 S Park View, Inc., A CA Corp. v. Jennifer Vargas

• Court: District Court, C.D. California
• Decided: December 15, 2023
• Docket: 2:23-cv-10284
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

JS-6 CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 2:23-cv-10284-HDV-ADSx Date: December 15, 2023 Title 511 S Park View, Inc. v. Jennifer Vargas

Present: The Honorable: Hernán D. Vera, United States District Judge

Wendy Hernandez None. Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants: None. None.

Proceedings: EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER TO REMAND UNLAWFUL DETAINER TO STATE COURT [DKT. NO. 7]

Plaintiff 511 S Park View, Inc. brought an unlawful detainer action against Defendant Jennifer Vargas in the Los Angeles County Superior Court on September 19, 2023 (“Complaint”) [Dkt. No. 1 at 11]. Defendant then filed a Notice of Removal in this Court on December 7, 2023 [Dkt. No. 1]. On December 13, 2023, Plaintiffs filed an Ex Parte Application for Order to Remand Unlawful Detainer to State Court (“Application”) [Dkt. No. 7],

The removing defendant bears the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction. Abrego v. Dow Chem. Co., 443 F.3d 676, 682 (9th Cir. 2006). Failure to do so requires that the case be remanded, as “[s]ubject matter jurisdiction may not be waived, and . . . the district court must remand if it lacks jurisdiction.” Kelton Arms Condo. Owners Ass’n v. Homestead Ins. Co., 346 F.3d 1190, 1192 (9th Cir. 2003) (citation omitted). A review of the Notice of Removal and state court Complaint demonstrates the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the action.

Removal is not warranted. “Only state-court actions that originally could have been filed in federal court may be removed to federal court by the defendant. Absent diversity of citizenship1, federal-question jurisdiction is required." Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386, 392 (1987) (footnotes omitted). Here, federal question jurisdiction is lacking because the Complaint does not state a claim "arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States." 28 U.S.C. § 1331. "Because landlord-tenant disputes are matters of state law, an action

1 The Complaint states that both Plaintiff and Defendant are citizens of California, so no diversity of citizenship exists. CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 2:23-cv-10284-HDV-ADSx Date: December 15, 2023 Title 511 S Park View, Inc. v. Jennifer Vargas for eviction cannot be the basis for federal question jurisdiction." Round Valley Indian Housing Authority v. Hunter, 907 F. Supp. 1343, 1348 (N.D. Cal. 1995) (citing Powers v. United States Postal Service, 71 F.2d 1041, 1045 (7th Cir. 1982) ("Federal common law of landlord and tenant does not exist.")).

Accordingly, the Court sua sponte grants Plaintiff’s Application, and the action is remanded to the state court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.