Order

TERRY J. HATTER, JR., Senior District Judge.

The Court has considered Plaintiff Jorge Ortiz's ex parte application to remand, together with the moving and opposing papers.

On January 18, 2018, Ortiz initiated an unlawful detainer action in California Superior Court for the County of Riverside against Defendant Anthony Lee, in part, because Lee was, allegedly selling marijuana on the leased premises. On April 5, 2018, Lee removed to this Court on the basis of federal question jurisdiction — contending that, inter alia, the First and Fourteenth Amendments were implicated because the property was being used as a church and that marijuana is "the sacrament of the church." On May 22, 2018, Ortiz filed an ex parte application to remand.

An ex parte application must be accompanied by a memorandum explaining, inter alia, the reasons for seeking emergency relief. See Local Rule 7-19. Here, Ortiz failed to provide any basis to warrant emergency relief and why he could not have filed a regularly noticed motion instead. Accordingly, this is an improper ex parte application.

Regardless, the Court has an obligation to determine, sua sponte, whether it has subject matter jurisdiction. See Lindley Contours, LLC v. AABB Fitness Holdings, Inc., 414 Fed. Appx. 62, *1 (9th Cir. 2011). Lee removed this action because his defenses are based upon federal law. However, "a case may not be removed to federal court on the basis of a federal defense." Rivet v. Regions Bank of La., 522 U.S. 470, 475 (1998).

Accordingly,

It is Ordered that the ex parte application to remand be, and hereby is, Denied.

It is further Ordered, sua sponte, that the case be, and hereby is, remanded to California Superior Court for the County of Riverside.