Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01278/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01278-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 870
Nature of Suit: Tax Suits
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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CTC REAL ESTATE SERVICES, )

)

Plaintiff, )

v. )

)

BILL FELTON, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

)

 )

1:06-cv-1278-AWI-SMS

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS RE: MOTION OF

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’S MOTION

TO REMAND ACTION TO STATE COURT

(DOCS. 5, 11)

ORDER REMANDING THE ACTION TO THE

MERCED COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

Defendant removed this action for damages from the Merced

County Superior Court. The matter has been referred to the

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rules

72-302 and 72-304. Pending before the Court is the motion of

Defendant United States of America to remand the action to state

court.

On October 30, 2006, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and

a recommendation that Defendant’s motion to remand the action to

state court be granted. The findings and recommendation were

served on all parties and contained notice that any objections to

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within ten (10)

court days after the date of service of the order. No party has

filed any objections.

Case 1:06-cv-01278-AWI -SMS Document 12 Filed 11/27/06 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

27

28

2

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi Valley United School Dist., 708 F.2d

452, 454 (9 Cir. 1983), this Court has conducted a de novo th

review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file,

the Court finds that the report and recommendation are supported

by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendation filed October 30, 2006,

are ADOPTED IN FULL; and

2. Defendant’s motion to remand the action to state court IS

GRANTED, and the action IS ORDERED REMANDED to the Merced County

Superior Court.

3. The Clerk of the Court shall mail to the Clerk of the

Merced County Superior Court a copy of this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 22, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01278-AWI -SMS Document 12 Filed 11/27/06 Page 2 of 2