Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-04776/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-04776-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 220
Nature of Suit: Foreclosure
Cause of Action: 28:1444 Petition for Removal- Foreclosure

---

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

1

 (Plaintiffs’ Notice of Motion and Motion for Remand to State Court Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1446 and L.R. 7-2 and Authorities in Support, hereafter, “Motion for Remand,” Docket Item No.

8.; Plaintiffs’ Notice of Motion and Motion to Stay Unlawful Detainer Action and Consolidate,

hereafter, “Motion to Consolidate,” Docket Item No. 20.)

2

 (Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint, hereafter, “Aurora’s

Motion,” Docket Item No. 4.; Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint; and

Joinder of Motion to Dismiss Filed by Aurora Loan Services, LLC, hereafter, “UVC’s Motion,”

Docket Item No. 12.)

3

 Counsel represented that he had “left his research at home.”

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

Marco Lahore, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

SCME Mortgage Banlers, Inc., et al.,

Defendants. /

NO. C 09-04776 JW 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: RULE 11

SANCTIONS

On February 8, 2010, the Court conducted a hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motions for Remand and

to Consolidate,1 and Defendants Aurora and UVC’s Motions to Dismiss.2 At the hearing, the Court

questioned Plaintiffs’ counsel as to the legal basis for Plaintiffs’ Motion to Consolidate a pending

state court unlawful detainer action, which has yet been removed to this Court (and indeed, might

not be removal under the “forum defendant” rule), with this federal action. Plaintiffs’ counsel

represented that he has found authority in this district that would permit the Court to exercise

“supplemental jurisdiction” over a state unlawful detainer action without having the action before

the Court.3

 Since the Court finds no legal basis for Plaintiffs’ counsel’s position, the Court

Case 5:09-cv-04776-JW Document 31 Filed 02/08/10 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

ORDERS counsel to show cause why he should not be sanctioned pursuant to Rule 11 of Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure.

Rule 11 authorizes sanctions against an attorney who signs a “pleading, written motion, [or]

other paper” brought for an improper purpose or that is frivolous, i.e., is not well grounded in fact,

warranted by existing law, or made in good faith. Christian v. Mattel, Inc., 286 F.3d 1118, 1127

(9th Cir. 2002). By prohibiting “frivolous” and “legally unreasonable” filings, Rule 11 “imposes

upon counsel an affirmative duty of investigation both as to law and fact before filing.” Rachel v.

Banana Republic, Inc., 831 F.2d 1503, 1508 (9th Cir. 1987). 

On or before February 11, 2010, Plaintiffs’ counsel shall file a response to the Order to

Show Cause. In his response, counsel shall set forth the legal basis for his Motion to Consolidate or

a good faith extension of the law. Failure to comply with any part of this Order will be deemed

sufficient grounds for sanctions.

Dated: February 8, 2010 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge

Case 5:09-cv-04776-JW Document 31 Filed 02/08/10 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

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:

David S. Hoffman dshoffmanesq@aol.com

Donald Michael Scotten donald.scotten@akerman.com

Justin D. Balser justin.balser@akerman.com

Justin Donald Balser justin.balser@akerman.com

Michael Patrick Rooney mike@mikerooneylaw.com

Dated: February 8, 2010 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: /s/ JW Chambers 

Elizabeth Garcia

Courtroom Deputy

Case 5:09-cv-04776-JW Document 31 Filed 02/08/10 Page 3 of 3