Prawoto

Prawoto v. PrimeLending

Good Law
720 F. Supp. 2d 1149·2010 WL 2593610·2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74468
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMay 4, 2010Case CV 09-06631 MMM (SSx)California7,105 words

Opinion

Opinion

Morrow, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO TRANSFER; DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS

On July 31, 2009, plaintiff Juniaty Prawoto commenced this action in Los Angeles Superior Court against defendant PrimeLending, a Plains Capital Company (“PrimeLending”), and certain fictitious defendants, alleging, inter alia, multiple state and federal violations in connection with a mortgage loan PrimeLending made to Prawoto in connection with an investment property located in Oak Point, Texas. On September 11, 2009, PrimeLending timely removed the action to federal court. Five days after removal, Prime-Lending moved to dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction or improper venue. In the alternative, PrimeLending sought to have the court transfer venue to the Eastern District of Texas. Prawoto has not opposed PrimeLending’s motion, despite the fact that on October 14, 2009, defense counsel wrote plaintiffs attorney, noting that no opposition had been filed and asking that plaintiffs counsel advise the court if his client did not oppose the motion.

The court delayed its decision of the motion because, on November 3, 2009, plaintiffs lawyer, Timothy Thurman, was suspended by the State Bar of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.