Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-02923/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cv-02923-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 441
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Voting
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH HOLDER, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

 v.

BRUCE MCPHERSON, as California

Secretary of State, et al.,

Defendants. /

No. C 06-2923 SBA

ORDER

[Docket No. 37]

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for Remand [Docket No. 37]. Having

read and considered the arguments presented by the parties in the papers submitted to the Court, the

Court finds this matter appropriate for resolution without a hearing. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff's Motion for Remand [Docket No. 37] is

GRANTED IN PART, to the extent that it argues that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction

over the above-captioned matter. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Plaintiff's Motion for Remand [Docket No. 37] is

DENIED IN PART, to the extent that it requests actual costs, including attorneys fees. The Court

finds that while removal was legally improper, Defendants had "an objectively reasonable basis for

seeking removal." See Martin v. Franklin Capital Corp., 126 S. Ct. 704, 711 (2005). The Petition

for Writ of Mandate ("Petition") contained a number of allegations regarding the federal Help

America Vote Act of 2002 and the Federal Election Commission's Voting Systems Performance and

Test Standards. These allegations were incorporated by reference into each of the Petition's nine

causes of action. Considering this incorporation by reference, along with the length and complexity
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

of the Petition, the Court finds that Defendants had an objectively reasonable basis for seeking

removal.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT the case is REMANDED to the Superior Court of the

State of California in and for the County of San Francisco. The clerk is directed to terminate any

pending matters and to close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

//

Dated: 7/17/06 

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge