Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01276/USCOURTS-azd-2_10-cv-01276-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 371
Nature of Suit: Truth in Lending
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Injunctive/Declaratory Relief

---

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

Juan Batres, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

vs.

(1)Homecomings Financial LLC

(2)Aurora Loan Services LLC

(3)Mortgage Electronic Registrations

Systems, Inc.

(4) Does.

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 10-1276-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 jurisdiction. See 28

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

(discussing the citizenship of a corporation); Johnson v. Columbia Properties Anchorage,

437 F.3d 894, 899 (9th Cir. 2006) (discussing the citizenship of a limited liability company).

Accordingly,

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:10-cv-01276-JAT Document 10 Filed 07/16/10 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

 The Court should not give a party advice because giving advice would undermine

a district judge’s role as an impartial decision maker. See Pliler v. Ford, 542 U.S. 225, 231

(2004).

- 2 -

IT IS ORDERED that by July 30, 2010, the removing Defendant 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

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant is cautioned that it will be given one

opportunity to amend to cure the jurisdiction defects. The Court will not issue additional sua

sponte show cause orders to assist Defendant in pleading jurisdiction.2

 Therefore, if the

amended notice of removal fails to plead federal subject matter jurisdiction, this case will be

remanded without the Court sua sponte granting Defendant any further opportunities to

amend.

DATED this 16th day of July, 2010.

Case 2:10-cv-01276-JAT Document 10 Filed 07/16/10 Page 2 of 2