Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04326/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-04326-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

ANTONIO ABOGADO,

Plaintiff,

v.

ROLANDO ENGRACIA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 15-cv-04326-WHO 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION

Re: Dkt. Nos. 2, 4

This order concerns Magistrate Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte’s September 25, 2015 report 

and recommendation finding that this case was improperly removed from the Superior Court of 

California for the County of Alameda because the asserted federal question on which removal was 

based was not in fact included in plaintiffs’ well-pleaded complaint. Dkt. No. 4. The report and 

recommendation also finds that removal was improper because there is no indication in the notice 

of removal that all properly joined and served defendants have joined in removal, as required 

under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(2)(A). Id. 

Judge Laporte recommends denying defendant Ronaldo Engracia’s application to proceed 

in forma pauperis – on the ground that his financial condition does not entitle him to such status –

and remanding the case to state court. Id. No objections have been filed.

Having reviewed the matter de novo, I ADOPT Judge Laporte’s report and 

recommendation in whole. For the reasons stated therein, Engracia’s application to proceed in 

forma pauperis is DENIED, and this case is REMANDED to Alameda County Superior Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 27, 2015

______________________________________

WILLIAM H. ORRICK

United States District Judge

Case 3:15-cv-04326-WHO Document 7 Filed 10/27/15 Page 1 of 1