Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00692/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-00692-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Grand Lilly Properties, LLC
Plaintiff
Max Molina
Defendant

Document Text:

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

GRAND LILLY PROPERTIES, LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

MAX MOLINA, 

Defendants. 

No. 2:16-cv-00692-KJM-KJN 

ORDER 

The issue in this case is unlawful detainer, with an amount in controversy of less 

than $2,000. See ECF No. 1. On April 1, 2016, defendant Max Molina removed the case from 

state court to federal court. Id. Additionally, defendant filed a motion to proceed in forma 

pauperis. ECF No. 2. 

When a case “of which the district courts of the United States have original

jurisdiction” is initially brought in state court, a defendant may remove it to federal court. 

28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). There are two bases for federal subject matter jurisdiction: (1) federal 

question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, and (2) diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1332. A federal district court may remand a case sua sponte where a defendant has not 

established federal jurisdiction. See Enrich v. Touche Ross & Co., 846 F.2d 1190, 1195 (9th Cir. 

1988) (citing Wilson v. Republic Iron & Steel Co., 257 U.S. 92, 97 (1921)). “If at any time 

Case 2:16-cv-00692-KJM-KJN Document 4 Filed 04/14/16 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 

2

before final judgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case 

shall be remanded.” 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). 

Here, the court finds the case should be remanded to the Sacramento County 

Superior Court. Because the amount in controversy is less than $75,000, and the main issue turns 

on state law, removal is improper because this court does not have subject matter jurisdiction. 

This case is remanded to Sacramento County Superior Court. Defendant’s IFP 

motion is DENIED as MOOT. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: April 14, 2016 

Case 2:16-cv-00692-KJM-KJN Document 4 Filed 04/14/16 Page 2 of 2