Erum

Associates National Bank v. Erum

Good Law
80 F. App'x 609
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 13, 2003No. 03-15320; D.C. No. CV-00-00769-SOM(BMK)California296 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Theodorico Erum, Jr. appeals pro se the district court’s judgment confirming an arbitration award and dismissing his counterclaims against Associates National Bank (“ANB”). Erum also appeals the *610 court’s interlocutory orders staying the action pending arbitration and compelling arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”). ANB filed this action in Hawaii state court, and Erum removed the action to the federal district court. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We vacate and remand.

‘We have an ongoing obligation to be sure that jurisdiction exists.” Matheson v. Progressive Specialty Ins. Co., 319 F.3d 1089, 1090 (9th Cir.2003) (per curiam) (order). The FAA does not provide an independent source of federal subject matter jurisdiction. See G.C. & K.B. Invs., Inc. v. Wilson, 326 F.3d 1096 , 1103 n. 4 (9th Cir.2003). It is not clear from the face of the complaint that the district court had either federal question or diversity jurisdiction over the action. See Matheson, 319 F.3d at 1090 (in a diversity action, the removing party must prove that amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 where it is not “facially evident” from complaint); Takeda v.…

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.