Mosley v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 802 F. Supp. 2d 695

Mosley owns property in Virginia Beach and secured a Wells Fargo mortgage in 2007.
She suffered job loss in 2008 leading to decreased income and sought a loan modification from Wells Fargo.
HJT determined Mosley qualified for a HAMP modification; applications were submitted in March–April 2011 and denied, then reopened efforts continued.
Foreclosure date was set for April 27, 2011 while modification review was ongoing.
Mosley filed a state-court complaint on April 21, 2011 alleging breach of contract, promissory estoppel, negligence, VCPA violation, and Trustee breach.
Defendants removed to federal court on May 16, 2011 claiming federal-question jurisdiction; the court sua sponte remanded for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, denying fees.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether federal-question jurisdiction exists	Mosley contends only state-law claims; no private HAMP action.	Plaintiff’s state-law claims reference HAMP and thus implicate federal law.	No federal-question jurisdiction; remand granted
Whether remand, not dismissal, is proper	Remand to state court as proper forum.	Removal was proper to address federal questions.	Remand granted to state court
Whether Plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees under § 1447(c)	Fees should be awarded for improper removal.	Removal was not objectively unreasonable given unsettled Fourth Circuit precedent.	Fees denied

Grable & Sons Metal Prods. v. Darue Eng'g & Mfg., 545 U.S. 308 (U.S. 2005) (establishes test for federal-question jurisdiction in state-law claims)
Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc. v. Thompson, 478 U.S. 804 (U.S. 1986) (federal-question jurisdiction requires substantial federal-law question)
Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. 500 (U.S. 2006) (jurisdictional questions may be raised sua sponte; lack of jurisdiction requires dismissal)
Sherman v. Litton Loan Servicing, 802 F. Supp. 2d 695 (E.D. Va. 2011) (agency and private-right issues influence removal and jurisdiction analysis)