CUENNTITREADL S DTIASTTERSIC DTI SOTFR CICATL ICFOOURRNTIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. No. 2:21-cv-06800-GW-DFM Date October 7, 2021 Title Santos Vasquez, et al. v. Specialized Loan Servicing LLC, et al.

Present: The Honorable GEORGE H. WU, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Javier Gonzalez None Present Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No. Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants: None Present None Present

PROCEEDINGS (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER DISMISSING THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

WITH PREJUDICE, DECLINING SUPPLEMENTAL

JURISDICTION, AND REMANDING REMAINDER

OF CASE TO STATE COURT

Defendants Specialized Loan Servicing LLC and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, Relating to Home Equity Mortgage Trust Series 2007-2, Home Equity Mortgaged Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-2 (collectively, “Defendants”) removed this case to this Court on August 23, 2021, asserting this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 due to the third cause of action in the Complaint plaintiffs Santos Vasquez and Amparo Vasquez (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court on July 20, 2021. See Notice of Removal, Docket No. 1, ¶ 5; Complaint, Docket No. 1-1, at 7:1-8:10. Although Defendants did not address the other claims in the Complaint in their Notice of Removal, this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction over those other claims would be due only to supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).1 Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on September 16, 2021, challenging each of the causes of action pled in the Complaint, and also challenging plaintiff Amparo Vasquez’s Article III standing. In their Opposition to the motion, Plaintiffs indicate that they “will cease to pursue causes of action” for, 1While Plaintiffs make reference to certain federal laws in their fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh causes of action (the first of which appears also to be a claim that Plaintiffs indicate they “will cease to pursue,” see Docket No. 18, at 1:10-14; Docket No. 21, at 2:22-3:2), see Complaint ¶¶ 46, 54(c), 54(e), 65-66, 75, those claims do not provide a basis for this Court’s original jurisdiction. See Rains v. Criterion Sys., Inc., 80 F.3d 339, 346 (9th Cir. 1996) (“When a claim can be supported by alternative and independent theories – one of which is a state law theory and one of which is a federal law theory – federal question jurisdiction does not attach because federal law is not a necessary element of the claim.”); see also Complaint ¶¶ 43, 47-48, 54(a), 54(b), 54(d), 65, 69, 74. :

CUENNTITREADL S DTIASTTERSIC DTI SOTFR CICATL ICFOOURRNTIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. No. 2:21-cv-06800-GW-DFM Date October 7, 2021 Title Santos Vasquez, et al. v. Specialized Loan Servicing LLC, et al. among other things, violation of the Truth in Lending Act, the source of their third cause of action2 (and, as noted above, the only basis for this Court’s original subject matter jurisdiction). See Docket No. 18, at 1:10-14. They offer no argument in support of those claims in their Opposition, nor do they express an intention to amend the claims (or provide a reason for believing that they can do so). In Reply, Defendants ask the Court to dismiss the third cause of action (along with the others Plaintiffs indicated they “will cease to pursue”). See Docket No. 21, at 2:22-3:2. The Court vacates the October 14, 2021 hearing date set for Defendants’ motion as no oral argument is necessary for its disposition. See C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-15. Because Plaintiffs indicate that they will cease to pursue at least their third cause of action (and offer no argument in support of it), that claim is dismissed with prejudice. The Court then declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remainder of the case, see 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3), and remands what remains of the case back to Los Angeles County Superior Court. It refrains from considering any of the arguments raised in the parties’ papers other than those specifically-related to Plaintiffs’ third cause of action. It is so ordered.

2While there is a third defendant named in the action – Affinia Default Services, LLC – that defendant is not named in the third claim for relief. See Complaint at 7:5. :