Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-05744/USCOURTS-cand-5_15-cv-05744-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28:1444 Petition for Removal- Foreclosure

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

JPMORGAN BANK, N.A.,

Plaintiff,

v.

DAVID RENFRO,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cv-05744-BLF 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION OF 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND

REMANDING ACTION TO THE

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY SUPERIOR 

COURT

The Court has reviewed the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Paul S. 

Grewal remanding sua sponte this unlawful detainer action and denying Defendant’s motion to 

proceed in forma pauperis. See ECF 6. No objections to the Report and Recommendation have 

been filed and the deadline to object has elapsed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) (deadline for 

objections is fourteen days after being served with report and recommendation); Certificate of 

Service, ECF 6-1 (Defendant served with R&R by mail on December 29, 2015).

The Court finds the Report correct, well-reasoned and thorough, and adopts it in every 

respect. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Mr. Alejandro Alianz’s motion to proceed in forma 

pauperis and the above-titled unlawful detainer action is REMANDED to the Santa Cruz County 

Superior Court. The Court TERMINATES AS MOOT JPMorgan Bank N.A.’s motion to remand, 

ECF 4, and motion to shorten time on the motion to remand, ECF 5.

Finally, the Court notes that this is the third time this unlawful detainer action has been 

removed from Santa Cruz Superior Court. See Docket No. 5 at 2; JPMorgan Chase Bank 

National Association v. Renfro, Case No. 5:15-cv-01730-BLF at Docket No. 1 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 16, 

2015) (“Renfro I”); JPMorganChase v. Renfro, Case No. 5:15-cv-02705-BLF at Docket No. 1 

Case 5:15-cv-05744-BLF Document 9 Filed 01/13/16 Page 1 of 2
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

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

(N.D. Cal. June 17, 2015) (“Renfro II”). After the Court warned Mr. David Renfro that further 

attempts to remove this action could result in sanctions, see Renfro II at 2, Mr. Renfro’s tenant, 

Mr. Alianz, appeared in the state court action and removed the action. The Court notes for the 

record that Mr. Alianz is utilizing the same address as Mr. Renfro’s attorney of record, Donald 

Schwartz. The Court advises Mr. Alianz that any further attempts to remove this action may result 

in sanctions. Furthermore, if there are further attempts to remove this action by anyone without an 

objectively reasonable basis, the Court may order all parties and their attorneys of records to 

appear in Court to explain why sanctions should not be awarded. The Court also reminds all 

counsel of their duty and responsibility to abide by the Standards of Professional Conduct 

contained in the Civil Local Rules. See Civil L.R. 11-4. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 13, 2016

 ______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:15-cv-05744-BLF Document 9 Filed 01/13/16 Page 2 of 2