Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00067/USCOURTS-caed-1_15-cv-00067-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Mario Ernesto Cabrera
Plaintiff
Eliseo Ramirez
Defendant

Document Text:

1

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Mario Ernesto Cabrera seeks the removal of the unlawful detainer action initiated by Eliseo 

Ramirez in Kern County Superior Court, Case No. S-1500-CL-284158. (Doc. 1.) Although Cabrera 

identifies himself as the plaintiff in the removing documents, he is the defendant named in the 

complaint filed in Case No. S-1500-CL-284158.1 Because an action for unlawful detainer arises under 

California law, the Magistrate Judge found the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the 

complaint. Accordingly, the Magistrate Judge recommended the action be remanded to Kern County 

Superior Court on January 21, 2015. (Doc. 4.)

 

1

The Court may take notice of facts that are capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources 

whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Fed. R. Evid. 201(b); United States v. Bernal-Obeso, 989 F.2d 331, 333 

(9th Cir. 1993). The accuracy of the Court’s records cannot reasonably be questioned, and judicial notice may be taken of 

court records. Mullis v. United States Bank. Ct., 828 F.2d 1385, 1388 n.9 (9th Cir. 1987); Valerio v. Boise Cascade Corp., 

80 F.R.D. 626, 635 n.1 (N.D. Cal. 1978), aff’d 645 F.2d 699 (9th Cir. 1981); see also Colonial Penn Ins. Co. v. Coil, 887 

F.2d 1236, 1239 (4th Cir. 1989); Rodic v. Thistledown Racing Club, Inc., 615 F.2d 736, 738 (6th Cir. 1980). Therefore, 

judicial notice is taken of the docket and complaint filed in Case No. S-1500-CL-284158.

MARIO ERNESTO CABRERA,

 Plaintiff,

v.

ELISEO RAMERIZ,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:15-cv-00067 - AWI - JLT

ORDER ADOPTING IN FULL THE FINDINGS 

AND RECOMMENDATIONS REMANDING THE 

MATTER TO KERN COUNTY SUPERIOR 

COURT FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Case 1:15-cv-00067-AWI-JLT Document 5 Filed 02/10/15 Page 1 of 2
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

Plaintiff was granted fourteen days from the date of service, or until February 4, 2015, to file 

any objections to the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. (Doc. 4 at 3-4.) Plaintiff was “advised 

that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s 

order.” (Id. at 4, citing Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991)). However, no objections have 

been filed. In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi Valley 

United School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), this Court conducted a de novo review of the 

case. Having carefully reviewed the file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations are 

supported by the record and proper analysis. 

Based upon the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. The Findings and Recommendations filed January 21, 2015 (Doc. 4) are ADOPTED 

IN FULL;

2. The matter is REMANDED to the Superior Court of Kern County; and 

3. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close the action, because this Order terminates the 

matter in its entirety.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 10, 2015 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:15-cv-00067-AWI-JLT Document 5 Filed 02/10/15 Page 2 of 2