Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02736/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02736-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 423
Nature of Suit: Bankruptcy Withdrawal 28 USC 157
Cause of Action: 28:0157 Motion for Withdrawal of Reference

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

----oo0oo----

In re: 

KET A. LAM, aka TONDY LAM, NO. CIV. S-06-2736 WBS DAD

d/b/a/ LAM’S MANDARIN, f/d/b/a, 

GRAND MANDARIN,

Debtor, (Bankruptcy Court No. 05-

28088-C7)

-----------------------------

(Adversary Proceeding No. 06-

THOMAS A. ACEITUNO, 2302)

Plaintiff,

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE:

v. MAINTENANCE OF JURISDICTION

CALVIN LAM,

Defendant.

-----------------------------

 ----oo0oo----

The court is in receipt of the parties’ stipulation

substituting Frank’s Quality Meats, Inc. (“FQM”), as plaintiff

and substituting counsel for plaintiff. The court now raises the

question, sua sponte, whether it can maintain jurisdiction over

this action if the proposed stipulation is granted. 

Case 2:06-cv-02736-WBS-DAD Document 24 Filed 07/09/07 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, only

authorized to adjudicate those cases which the Constitution and

Congress permit. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511

U.S. 375, 377 (1994). “A federal court is presumed to lack

jurisdiction in a particular case unless the contrary

affirmatively appears.” Stock W., Inc. v. Confederated Tribes of

the Colville Reservation, 873 F.2d 1221, 1225 (9th Cir. 1989)

(citing Cal. ex rel. Younger v. Andrus, 608 F.2d 1247, 1249 (9th

Cir. 1979)). 

The district courts have original and exclusive

jurisdiction of all cases under title 11 and original, but

non-exclusive jurisdiction of all civil proceedings arising

under, arising in, or related to a case under title 11. 28

U.S.C. § 1334. A proceeding is related to a bankruptcy case when

“the outcome of that proceeding could conceivably have any effect

on the estate. . . . [and] could alter the debtor’s rights,

liabilities, options, or freedom of action (either positively or

negatively). . . .” Pacor, Inc. v. Higgins, 743 F.2d 984, 994

(3d Cir. 1984). The court questions whether there will still be

some nexus between this suit and the underlying bankruptcy case

if FQM is substituted as plaintiff. The parties and counsel for

FQM are therefore instructed to simultaneously brief the question

of whether the court would still have jurisdiction if FQM is

substituted as plaintiff in this action. 

This case is set for Status Conference at 2:00 p.m. on

///

///

///

Case 2:06-cv-02736-WBS-DAD Document 24 Filed 07/09/07 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

August 13, 2007. The briefs shall be filed on or before July 30,

2007.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: July 6, 2007

 

Case 2:06-cv-02736-WBS-DAD Document 24 Filed 07/09/07 Page 3 of 3