Glaude

DISCUSSION

I. The Case was Improperly Removed to Federal Court and Must be Remanded

8 1. The Case Does Not Implicate a Federal Question 9 The state action removed solely asserts a state law claim for unlawful detainer. Cal. Code Civ. P. § 1161(a). Therefore, removal based on federal question jurisdiction is improper. See 28 U.S.C. § 1441(c). 13 2. Removal Based on Diversity of Citizenship is Improper Based on the Forum Defendant Rule

The forum defendant rule provides that a civil action properly removable based on diversity jurisdiction may not be removed if any of the defendants joined or served are citizens of 17 the forum state. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2). The forum defendant rule “confines removal on the basis 18 of diversity jurisdiction where no defendant is a citizen of the forum state.” Lively v. Wild Oats 19 Mkts., 456 F.3d 933, 939 (9th Cir. 2006). 20 In this case, the Defendant removing the action is a California resident. See Not. of 21 Removal, ECF 1, at 1 (providing Defendant’s California address). Therefore, the Forum Defendant Rule bars removal otherwise proper under diversity jurisdiction…