Goffney v. Bank of America, N.A., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133112

In 2006 Goffney obtained a mortgage with BANA, which also serviced the loan.
Goffney allegedly defaulted after June 2010 due to financial hardship.
She sought HAMP modification; BANA allegedly denied qualification.
BANA later indicated HAFA consideration but allegedly reversed qualification and timing.
foreclosure occurred after acceleration; Freddie Mac purchased the home at a May 1, 2012 sale.
Goffney sues for breach of contract and TDCA violations; removal sought federal question jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether federal question jurisdiction exists over remand dispute	Goffney argues no federal question; claims are state-law.	BANA/Freddie Mac argue HAMP/HAFA interpretations create federal issue.	No federal question; remand granted.

Franchise Tax Bd. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust, 463 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1983) (removal jurisdiction depends on state-court pleadings; presumption against removal)
Merrell Dow Pharm. Inc. v. Thompson, 478 U.S. 804 (U.S. 1986) (mere presence of federal issue in state action does not confer jurisdiction)
Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386 (U.S. 1987) (well-pleaded complaint rule for federal question jurisdiction)
American Well Works Co. v. Layne & Bowler Co., 241 U.S. 257 (U.S. 1916) (federal law-create-the-cause-of-action theory)
Empire Healthchoice Assur., Inc. v. McVeigh, 547 U.S. 677 (U.S. 2006) (special and small federal-question jurisdiction category)
Grable & Sons Metal Prods., Inc. v. Dane Eng’g & Mfg., 545 U.S. 308 (U.S. 2005) (federal issue must be substantial and central to claim)
Willy v. Coastal Corp., 855 F.2d 1160 (5th Cir. 1988) (federal question jurisdiction not established if federal issue not necessary to success)
Borden v. Allstate Ins. Co., 589 F.3d 168 (5th Cir. 2009) (illustrates when federal regulation codifies the contract terms and triggers jurisdiction)