Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01473/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01473-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ADVENTIST HEALTH SYSTEM, et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-06-1465 FCD KJM PS

vs.

BARBARA CLARK,

Defendant. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

and related actions. No. CIV S-06-1466 FCD KJM PS

No. CIV S-06-1468 FCD KJM PS

No. CIV S-06-1470 FCD KJM PS

No. CIV S-06-1471 FCD KJM PS

No. CIV S-06-1473 FCD KJM PS

 /

The above-titled actions were related by order dated July 11, 2006. Findings and

recommendations previously issued in case nos. CIV S-06-1467 and CIV S-06-1472, which were

also related to these actions.

Defendant has filed a notice of removal of a state court petition of employer for

injunction prohibiting violence or threats of violence against employee in which plaintiff seeks a

stay away order against defendant. There is no basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction

evident in the state court action. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), this action should therefore be

Case 2:06-cv-01473-FCD-KJM Document 5 Filed 07/13/06 Page 1 of 2
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

2

summarily remanded.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the above-titled actions be

summarily remanded to the Superior Court of California, County of Placer.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. The parties are advised

that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District

Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

DATED: July 12, 2006.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

006

clark1465.rem

Case 2:06-cv-01473-FCD-KJM Document 5 Filed 07/13/06 Page 2 of 2