HSBC Bank USA National Association v. Nina Nguyen, 8:13-cv-00618

Plaintiff HSBC Bank USA, N.A. filed a state-law unlawful detainer action in Orange County Superior Court seeking possession for less than $10,000 in damages.
Property at 8366 Terranova Circle, Huntington Beach, California, had been sold to Plaintiff at a Trustee’s Sale on January 17, 2013.
Defendant Nina Nguyen, acting pro se, removed the case to federal court on April 18, 2013, asserting federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
The district court sua sponte remanded the case back to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Removal standards require the removing party to establish federal jurisdiction, and removal is strictly construed against removal jurisdiction.
Plaintiff’s complaint presents a straightforward state-law unlawful detainer claim; Nguyen’s asserted federal theories rely on statutes governing HUD foreclosure procedures, which do not create federal-question jurisdiction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether federal-question jurisdiction exists	Nguyen asserts a federal question via due process claims related to the Trustee Sale.	Nguyen contends federal statutes grant jurisdiction over her claims.	No federal-question jurisdiction; state-law action remanded.
Whether removal was proper given the nature of the claim	Nguyen removed asserting federal question.	Courts must evaluate removal to determine jurisdiction exists.	Removal rejected; jurisdiction lacking; case remanded.

Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564 (9th Cir. 1992) (federal jurisdiction must be rejected if there is any doubt about removal)
Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Taylor, 481 U.S. 58 (U.S. 1987) (federal question must appear on the face of the complaint)
Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Sys., Inc., 535 U.S. 826 (U.S. 2002) (jurisdiction cannot be founded on defenses or counterclaims)
Sullivan v. First Affiliated Sec., Inc., 813 F.2d 1368 (9th Cir. 1987) (defense-based theories do not create federal jurisdiction)