Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00818/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00818-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 290
Nature of Suit: Other Real Property Actions
Cause of Action: 28:2409(a) Quiet Title Action

---

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

STIPULATION AND ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION Page 1

McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

YOSHINORI H. T. HIMEL #66194

Assistant U. S. Attorney

501 I Street, Suite 10-100

Sacramento, California 95814

Telephone: (916) 554-2760

Attorneys for Federal Defendant

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MATTHEW CARLTON AND MICHELLE

CARLTON,

Plaintiffs,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,

Defendants.

1:07-cv-00818-AWI-NEW

STIPULATION AND ORDER

DISMISSING ACTION FOR

LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER

JURISDICTION

Plaintiffs and federal defendant, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(ii) and LR 83-143(a)(1)

and (b), and in the absence of any appearance by the other parties to this action, hereby recite

and stipulate, subject to the approval of the Court as provided for hereon, as follows:

1. Plaintiffs assert, and federal defendant does not disagree, that the boundary

separating plaintiffs' land from the federal land is not a fence line but a segment of the

boundary separating the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 29, Township 8

South, Range 21 East, M.D.B.&M., from the northeast quarter of the southeast quarter of said

section. See the survey map of the plaintiffs’ property attached to the complaint as Exhibit A,

and the attachment to this stipulation, which is a preliminary report dated July 18, 2007.

2. There thus is no case or controversy between plaintiffs and federal defendant.

Case 1:07-cv-00818-AWI-LJO Document 18 Filed 08/17/07 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

STIPULATION AND ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION Page 2

3. Accordingly, this action should be and hereby is DISMISSED for lack of subject

matter jurisdiction.

Dated: August 14, 2007 DOWLING, AARON & KEELER, INC.

By: /s/ Jeffrey P. Davis 

JEFFREY P. DAVIS

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Dated: August 15, 2007 McGREGOR W. SCOTT

United States Attorney

By: /s/ Y H T Himel 

YOSHINORI H. T. HIMEL

Assistant U. S. Attorney

Attorneys for Federal Defendant

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 17, 2007 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00818-AWI-LJO Document 18 Filed 08/17/07 Page 2 of 2