Filed: Sep. 18, 2017
Latest Update: Sep. 18, 2017
Summary: ORDER RE: REMAND FERNANDO M. OLGUIN , District Judge . The court has reviewed the parties' responses to the Court's Order to Show Cause Re: Supplemental Jurisdiction. (Dkt. 17, "OSC"). Given the parties' agreement to remand of the action, ( see 18, Plaintiff's Response to Order to Show Cause (Dkt. 18, "Plf. Response") at 2-6); Dkt. 19, [Defendants'] Response to Order to Show Cause at 7), the court will remand the action. To the extent plaintiff seeks fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1447(c)
Summary: ORDER RE: REMAND FERNANDO M. OLGUIN , District Judge . The court has reviewed the parties' responses to the Court's Order to Show Cause Re: Supplemental Jurisdiction. (Dkt. 17, "OSC"). Given the parties' agreement to remand of the action, ( see 18, Plaintiff's Response to Order to Show Cause (Dkt. 18, "Plf. Response") at 2-6); Dkt. 19, [Defendants'] Response to Order to Show Cause at 7), the court will remand the action. To the extent plaintiff seeks fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1447(c) 1..
More
ORDER RE: REMAND
FERNANDO M. OLGUIN, District Judge.
The court has reviewed the parties' responses to the Court's Order to Show Cause Re: Supplemental Jurisdiction. (Dkt. 17, "OSC"). Given the parties' agreement to remand of the action, (see 18, Plaintiff's Response to Order to Show Cause (Dkt. 18, "Plf. Response") at 2-6); Dkt. 19, [Defendants'] Response to Order to Show Cause at ¶ 7), the court will remand the action. To the extent plaintiff seeks fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c)1 (see Dkt. 18, Plf. Response at 2-4), it is without merit. "Absent unusual circumstances, courts may award attorney's fees under § 1447(c) only where the removing party lacked an objectively reasonable basis for seeking removal." Martin v. Franklin Capital Corp., 546 U.S. 132, 141, 126 S.Ct. 704, 711) (2005). Here, defendants properly removed the action based on federal question jurisdiction because plaintiff asserted a claim pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692, et seq. (See Dkt. 1, Notice of Removal at ¶ 5; Exh A, Complaint).
This Order is not intended for publication. Nor is it intended to be included in or submitted to any online service such as Westlaw or Lexis.
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The above-captioned action shall be remanded to the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Ventura, 3855-F Alamo Street, Simi Valley, California 93063.
2. The Clerk shall send a certified copy of this Order to the state court.
