Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-06576/USCOURTS-cand-3_12-cv-06576-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1331(a) Fed. Question: Real Property

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NORMAN J. WRAY and ANNA R. WRAY,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 12-06576 JSW

ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR

LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER

JURISDICTION

On December 31, 2012, Plaintiffs filed a Complaint in this action, in which they allege

that this Court has jurisdiction. Federal courts are under a duty to raise and decide issues of

subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte at any time it appears subject matter jurisdiction may be

lacking. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12; Augustine v. United States, 704 F.2d 1074, 1077 (9th Cir. 1983). If

the Court determines that subject matter jurisdiction is lacking, the Court must dismiss the case. 

Id.; Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). California superior courts are courts of general, unlimited

jurisdiction and can render enforceable judgments in practically any type of case. However,

federal courts have limited jurisdiction. Federal courts can only adjudicate cases which the

Constitution or Congress authorize them to adjudicate: those cases involving diversity of

citizenship (where the parties are from diverse states), or a federal question, or those cases to

which the United States is a party. See, e.g., Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of

America, 511 U.S. 375 (1994). Federal courts are presumptively without jurisdiction over civil

cases and the burden of establishing the contrary rests upon the party asserting jurisdiction. Id.

at 377. 

Case 3:12-cv-06576-JSW Document 8 Filed 01/04/13 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Plaintiff asserts jurisdiction based on a federal question. However, Plaintiff’s only

federal claim is one under the Declaratory Judgment Act. This statute does not provide an

independent basis for jurisdiction. Schilling v. Rogers, 363 U.S. 666, 677 (1960) (“[T]he

Declaratory Judgments Act is not an independent source of federal jurisdiction.”) (quoting

Skelly Oil Co. v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 339 U.S. 667, 671 (1950)); see also Countrywide

Home Loans, Inc., v. Mortgage Guar. Ins. Corp. 642 F.3d 849, 853-54 (9th Cir. 2011) (the

Declaratory Judgment Act “does not confer jurisdiction,” but rather requires an independent

jurisdictional basis).

Diversity jurisdiction is not present here either. This Court only has original subject

matter jurisdiction in diversity cases where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum of

$75,000 and is between citizens of different states. 28 U.S.C. § 1332. No plaintiff can be a

citizen of the same state as any of the defendants. Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. 267 (1806). 

According to Plaintiffs’ Complaint, Plaintiffs are residents of California and Defendant MTC

Financial, Inc. d/b/a Trustee Corps is also a resident of California. Therefore, based on the face

of the Complaint, the parties are not completely diverse. 

Accordingly, because the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this action, the

Court must dismiss this case. However, this ruling is without prejudice to Plaintiffs refiling

their claims in state court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 4, 2013 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:12-cv-06576-JSW Document 8 Filed 01/04/13 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NORMAN WRAY et al,

Plaintiff,

 v.

BANK OF AMERICA et al,

Defendant. /

Case Number: CV12-06576 JSW 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S.

District Court, Northern District of California.

That on January 4, 2013, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing

said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by

depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office

delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office.

Anna R. Wray

Norman J. Wray

2010 Morningside Mountain Drive

Glen Ellen, CA 95442

Dated: January 4, 2013

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: Jennifer Ottolini, Deputy Clerk

Case 3:12-cv-06576-JSW Document 8 Filed 01/04/13 Page 3 of 3