Schroeder

(UD)(PS) Coastline Capital Fund III, LLC v. Schroeder

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaOctober 26, 20202:20-cv-02111California1,059 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 COASTLINE CAPITAL FUND III, No. 2:20-cv-02111-JAM-CKD

LLC,

12 Plaintiff, 13 SUA SPONTE ORDER REMANDING v. ACTION TO STATE COURT 14 RITA A. SCHROEDER and JOSEPH 15 FRANK PAUL RAMOS, 16 Defendants. 17

18 The undersigned revokes any actual or anticipated referral 19 to a Magistrate Judge for the purposes of Findings and 20 Recommendations in this case. See Local Rule 302(d) 21 (“Notwithstanding any other provision of this Rule, a Judge may 22 retain any matter otherwise routinely referred to a Magistrate 23 Judge.”). 24 25 On October 22, 2020, Defendant Rita A. Schroeder filed a 26 Notice of Removal with this Court, seeking to remove an action 27 from the Superior Court for the County of Sacramento. Notice of 28 1 Removal, ECF No. 1. For the following reasons, the Court sua 2 sponte REMANDS this case to the Superior Court of California for 3 the County of Sacramento. 4 Under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a), a defendant may remove an action 5 to federal court if the…

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.