Federal National Mortgage Association v. Sanchez
3:12-cv-04718
N.D. Cal.Sep 13, 2012Background
- FDMS Northern District of California case removed unlawful detainer from Yolo County Superior Court on Sept. 10, 2012.
- Unlawful detainer is a creature of California law and not a federal issue, raising jurisdiction concerns for removal.
- Court sua sponte questioned removal jurisdiction and ordered defendant to show cause why case should not be remanded.
- Defendant must file a declaration by Sept. 27, 2012 addressing how this Court has federal jurisdiction over the unlawful detainer claim.
- Franchise Tax Board and Ninth Circuit authorities hold federal defenses (e.g., PTFA) cannot justify removal.
- Court scheduled hearing for Oct. 11, 2012 to consider jurisdiction and potential remand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether federal jurisdiction exists over a state-law unlawful detainer claim | Sanchez contends removal is proper under federal jurisdiction. | Sanchez asserts federal question or complete preemption theories justify removal. | Lack of federal jurisdiction; case to be remanded unless proven otherwise. |
| Whether anticipated federal defenses can confer removal jurisdiction | PTFA defense could anticipate in plaintiff’s claim and support removal. | Anticipated federal defenses do not confer jurisdiction for removal. | Anticipated defenses do not establish removal jurisdiction. |
| Whether the court should remand to state court based on lack of jurisdiction | Removal improper; action should be remanded. | No position stated beyond jurisdictional concerns; attempts to avoid remand. | Court orders remand unless jurisdiction is shown; remand likely. |
| What procedure governs the show-cause remand process | Defendant must demonstrate jurisdiction via declaration. | Defendant to provide information to persuade court to retain federal jurisdiction. | Show-cause order and hearing scheduled; declaration due and hearing set. |
Key Cases Cited
- Franchise Tax Bd. of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. 1 (1983) (federal defenses cannot justify removal)
- Berg v. Leason, 32 F.3d 422 (9th Cir. 1994) (federal defenses do not confer jurisdiction)
- ARCO Environmental Remediation, LLC v. Dept. of Health and Environmental Quality of the State of Montana, 213 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. 2000) (federal law defenses cannot establish removal jurisdiction)
- Valles v. Ivy Hill Corp., 410 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2005) (federal law defense not a basis for removal)