MEMORANDUM OPINION

VIRGINIA EMERSON HOPKINS, District Judge.

This action for unlawful detainer and ejectment was commenced by Plaintiff America's Home Place, Inc.'s ("AHP") filing of a complaint in the Circuit Court of Talladega County against Defendants LaTesha W. King ("Ms. King") and Nicholas King ("Mr. King") on July 21, 2016. (Doc. 1 at 1 ¶ 1). Both Defendants have been served with a summons and a copy of the state court complaint. (Id. ¶¶ 2, 3). On August 5, 2016, Ms. King filed a voluntary bankruptcy petition under Chapter 13 in the Eastern Division of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Case No. 16-41271-JJR13 (the "Bankruptcy Proceeding"). (Id. ¶ 3).

In light of Ms. King's Bankruptcy Proceeding and Mr. King's co-debtor status pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1301, AHP removed the state court case to this court on September 13, 2016, under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 13341 and 28 U.S.C. § 1452.2 (Doc. 1 at 2 ¶ 7). In its removal petition, AHP indicated that it would subsequently seek a referral of this case to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Eastern Division. (Doc. 1 at 1).

On September 15, 2016, AHP filed a Motion To Remand (Doc. 3) (the "Motion"). The Motion reports that Ms. King has moved for and obtained a dismissal of her Bankruptcy Proceeding. (Doc. 3 at 2 ¶ 4). Further, attached to the Motion is a copy of the order by the Bankruptcy Court dismissing Ms. King's Bankruptcy Proceeding on September 13, 2016. (Doc. 3 at 5). Therefore, the Motion seeks a remand to the Circuit Court of Talladega County because AHP's basis for removal and reference to the Bankruptcy Court-Ms. King's Bankruptcy Proceeding-no longer exists. (Doc. 3 at 2 ¶ 5).

The court entered an order (Doc. 6) on September 19, 2016, directing Defendants to show cause, no later than 5:00 p.m. on September 29, 2016, why the Motion should not be granted. The show cause deadline has passed without any filing by Defendants.

Subsequently, however, AHP filed an Amended Motion To Remand (Doc. 8) ("Amended Motion") on October 3, 2016. This Amended Motion asks this court to defer ruling on AHP's Motion for 60 days based upon a show cause response filed in a separate case-1:16-CV-1514-KOB-pending before another judge that involves AHP, Ms. King, Mr. King, and two additional defendants. (Doc. 8 at 4 ¶ 10). In that attached show cause response, Ms. King and Mr. King indicate that they "are in the process of filing a Chapter 7 Bankruptcy." (Doc. 8 at 8 ¶ 2). Interpreting this show cause response to mean "that a second bankruptcy filing is imminent," AHP suggests that remanding the case immediately would be a waste of judicial and its resources. (Doc. 8 at 4 ¶ 10).

AHP has not offered any supporting authority to hold its Motion in abeyance for 60 days. Regardless, the court is not persuaded to defer ruling on the Motion as AHP requests, especially in the absence of any express objection raised by Ms. King and Mr. King in this action. Accordingly, the Amended Motion is due to be denied and the Motion is due to be granted. The court will enter a separate order of remand pursuant to § 1452(b).