Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-01622/USCOURTS-caed-2_20-cv-01622-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act

---

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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KEENAN WILKINS,

Plaintiff,

v.

S. HESLOP, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:20-cv-1622 KJM DB P

ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief 

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

Before this court is plaintiff’s objection to removal of this action to federal court and a 

motion to remand. (ECF No. 7). For the reasons stated below, the court shall direct the Clerk of 

Court to update the docket to reflect that plaintiff wishes to withdraw the motion.

On August 13, 2020, defendants removed this action from state court to this one. (See

ECF Nos. 1, 2, 4). Thereafter, on August 26, 2020, plaintiff filed an objection to its removal and 

a motion to remand the matter. (See ECF No. 7). In support of the motion, plaintiff argued that it 

should be granted because three of the four named defendants in the action had not yet been 

served, and the removal had been done to interfere with plaintiff’s ability to serve them. (See

ECF No. 7 at 2-3).

Case 2:20-cv-01622-DJC-SCR Document 10 Filed 10/02/20 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

27

28

2

On September 16, 2020, defendant B. Velasquez – one of the four named defendants in 

this action – filed an opposition to plaintiff’s motion to remand. (See ECF No. 8). In it, 

defendant Velasquez argues that he was entitled to remove the action to this court on his own, and 

that in any event, the court may order service of the remaining defendants once the matter has 

been screened. (See ECF No. 8 at 2). Thereafter, on September 23, 2020, plaintiff filed a notice 

requesting that his motion for remand be withdrawn.

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall update the docket 

to reflect that plaintiff wishes to WITHDRAW his objection to removal and motion to remand 

filed August 26, 2020 (ECF No. 7).

Dated: October 1, 2020

DLB:13

DB/ORDERS/ORDERS.PRISONER.CIVIL RIGHTS/wilk1622.wdrwl.mtr

1

 Plaintiff states that he wishes to withdraw the motion for remand because the three remaining 

named defendants have been served in state court. (See ECF No. 9 at 1).

Case 2:20-cv-01622-DJC-SCR Document 10 Filed 10/02/20 Page 2 of 2