Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-00592/USCOURTS-casd-3_18-cv-00592-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1446fr Notice of Removal - Fraud

---

1

18CV592-LAB (JLB)

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL 

TRUST COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

v.

LAWRENCE MONTEFORTE,

Defendant.

Case No.: 18CV592-LAB (JLB)

ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO 

PROCEED IN FORMA 

PAUPERIS; AND

ORDER OF REMAND

Defendant Lawrence Monteforte filed a notice of removal of this unlawful 

detainer action, along with a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). The IFP 

motion shows he has $350 in the bank and is receiving a steady paycheck of $3500 

(of which his take-home pay is $1200) – though he does not specify for what time 

period this is. The portion of the application dealing with expenses is left blank. 

The incomplete IFP motion is DENIED.

The notice of removal does not establish jurisdiction; instead, it merely 

strings together assertions that appear to have been clipped from other sources. 

Looking at the complaint, there is no basis for this Court’s exercise of jurisdiction. 

No federal question is present on the face of the complaint, and any federal issues 

Monteforte may be raising as a defense do not create federal question jurisdiction. 

Case 3:18-cv-00592-LAB-JLB Document 3 Filed 03/23/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 1 of 2
2

18CV592-LAB (JLB)

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

See Vaden v. Discover Bank, 556 U.S. 49, 60 (2009). The complaint does not 

seek title to the property, but merely the right to possession. See Evans v. Superior 

Ct., 67 Cal. App. 3d 162, 170 (Cal. App. 2 Dist. 1977). In that case, that is well 

below the the amount in controversy required for diversity jurisdiction. See Cohn 

v. Petsmart, Inc., 281 F.3d 837, 840 (9th Cir. 2002) (“In actions seeking declaratory 

or injunctive relief, it is well established that the amount in controversy is measured 

by the value of the object of the litigation.”)

This action is REMANDED to the Superior Court of California for the County 

of San Diego. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 23, 2018

Hon. Larry Alan Burns

United States District Judge

Case 3:18-cv-00592-LAB-JLB Document 3 Filed 03/23/18 PageID.<pageID> Page 2 of 2