Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02189/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-02189-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1444 Petition for Removal- Foreclosure

---

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL 

Case No. CV 12-06874 DMG (CWx) Date August 22, 2012 

 

Title Edgar Edusada v. Bank of America, N.A., et al. Page 1 of 3 

CV-90 CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk vv 

Present: The Honorable DOLLY M. GEE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

 

VALENCIA VALLERY NOT REPORTED 

Deputy Clerk Court Reporter 

 

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s) Attorneys Present for Defendant(s) 

None Present None Present 

Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS—ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION 

SHOULD NOT BE TRANSFERRED TO THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF 

CALIFORNIA 

Before this Court is a complaint by Plaintiff Edgar Edusada, seeking relief from 

Defendant Bank of America, N.A.. The complaint raises claims for unfair competition, Cal. Bus. 

& Prof. Code § 17200 et seq., and false and misleading advertising, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 

17535, arising out of Defendants’ allegedly false advertisements regarding a hiatus on 

foreclosure sales. On August 9, 2012, Defendant removed this action from the Los Angeles 

County Superior Court based on diversity jurisdiction. According to the allegations in the 

complaint, Plaintiff’s property is located in San Diego and Defendant is a Delaware business 

entity with its principal place of business in North Carolina. (Complt. ¶ 4 [Doc. # 1].) 

Federal venue law provides that a civil action may be brought in – 

(1) a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents 

of the State in which the district is located; 

(2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving 

rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of 

the action is situated; or 

(3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided 

in this section, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s 

personal jurisdiction with respect to such action. 

28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). “The district court of a district in which is filed a case laying venue in the 

wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to 

any district or division in which it could have been brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The Court 

Case 3:12-cv-02189-CAB-KSC Document 12 Filed 08/22/12 Page 1 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL 

Case No. CV 12-06874 DMG (CWx) Date August 22, 2012 

 

Title Edgar Edusada v. Bank of America, N.A., et al. Page 2 of 3 

CV-90 CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk vv 

has authority on its own motion to decide the venue issue and to dismiss the action before a 

responsive pleading is filed. See Costlow v. Weeks, 790 F.2d 1486, 1488 (9th Cir. 1986). 

 The parties are hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this action should not be 

transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of California for the 

convenience of the parties and witnesses, and in the interest of justice. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 124(a), 

1404(a). All factual matters relied upon in the parties’ submissions must be supported by 

appropriate declarations and admissible evidence. To assist the Court in determining whether 

transfer is appropriate and in the interest of justice, the parties are directed to address the 

following, in addition to sharing their beliefs as to which forum is more convenient for the 

parties and witnesses: 

(1) Whether this action could have been brought in the Southern District of 

California; 

(2) Whether venue is appropriate in the Southern District of California; 

(3) What contacts, if any, each of the parties has to the Central District of California 

and to the Southern District of California. The parties should include information 

such as the location of their residence, administrative offices, real property, 

sources of revenue, and points of public contact; 

(4) What connection Plaintiffs’ causes of action have to the Central District of 

California and to the Southern District of California; 

(5) Which witnesses are expected to be called and where they reside; 

(6) The availability of compulsory process to compel attendance of unwilling nonparty witnesses in the Central District of California as compared to the Southern 

District of California; 

(7) The ease of access to sources of proof in each of the two forums; 

(8) The expected difference in the cost of litigation in the Central District of 

California as compared to the Southern District of California; and 

Case 3:12-cv-02189-CAB-KSC Document 12 Filed 08/22/12 Page 2 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL 

Case No. CV 12-06874 DMG (CWx) Date August 22, 2012 

 

Title Edgar Edusada v. Bank of America, N.A., et al. Page 3 of 3 

CV-90 CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk vv 

(9) Whether there are any alternative forums, other than the Central District of 

California or the Southern District of California, that would be more convenient 

for this action and why, keeping in mind the inquiries above. 

 The parties shall file a response to this Order, in writing not to exceed 15 pages, no later 

than September 5, 2012. Failure to timely respond to this Order will result in the transfer of this 

action. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Case 3:12-cv-02189-CAB-KSC Document 12 Filed 08/22/12 Page 3 of 3