Singleton

(UD)(PS) Roem Development Corporation v. Singleton

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMay 9, 20232:23-cv-00847California498 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 Roem Development Corporation, No. 2:23-cv-00847-KJM-KJIN Plaintiff, ORDER v. Gloria Singleton, 1S Defendant. 16 On May 4, 2023, pro se defendant Gloria Singleton removed this unlawful detainer action 18 from the Solano County Superior Court. Notice of Removal, ECF No. 1. As explained below, 19 the court remands the case back to that court. When a case “of which the district courts of the United States have original jurisdiction” is iitially brought in state court, a defendant may remove it to federal court. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). There are two primary bases for federal subject matter jurisdiction: (1) federal question 23 jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, and (2) diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Here, 24 defendant relies only on the first basis. See Notice of Removal at 2.’ A federal district court may remand a case sua sponte where a defendant has not established federal…

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.