Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01929/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01929-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Breach of Contract

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

James M. Brannan, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Federal National Mortgage Association;

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 10-1929-PHX-JAT

ORDER

“Inquiring whether the court has jurisdiction is a federal judge’s first duty in every

case.” Belleville Catering Co. v. Champaign Market Place, L.L.C., 350 F.3d 691, 693 (7th

Cir. 2003). 

In this case, the notice of removal fails to sufficiently plead diversity jurisdiction. See

28 U.S.C. § 1332; Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 130 S. Ct. 1181, 1192; - - - U.S. - - - (2010);

Handcock Fin. Corp. v. Fed. Sav. And Loan Ins. Corp., 492 F.2d 1325, 1329 (9th Cir. 1974)

(holding that a corporation that is chartered by the federal government and has its principal

place of business in the District of Columbia “has citizenship in no particular state for

diversity purposes”); Prize Energy Resources, L.P. v. Santa Fe Pacific Railroad Co., 2009

WL 160359, 3-4 (Dist. Ariz. 2009) (same).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that by October 25, 2010, Defendants (as the parties asserting

jurisdiction and therefore, with the burden of pleading jurisdiction, see Lew v. Moss, 797

Case 2:10-cv-01929-RCJ Document 11 Filed 10/06/10 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

1

 The amended notice of removal must contain all jurisdictional allegations sufficient

to plead jurisdiction in one document and should not anticipate that the Court will read any

previous filings to assess jurisdiction. See Harris v. Bankers Life and Casualty Co., 425 F.3d

689, 695-96 (9th Cir. 2005); Valdez v. Allstate, 372 F.3d 1115, 1117 (9th Cir. 2004).

- 2 -

F.2d 747, 749 (9th Cir. 1986)) shall file an amended notice of removal properly alleging

federal subject matter jurisdiction, or this case will be remanded for lack of federal subject

matter jurisdiction.1

DATED this 6th day of October, 2010.

Case 2:10-cv-01929-RCJ Document 11 Filed 10/06/10 Page 2 of 2