Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01792/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01792-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Dexter Barbosa
Plaintiff
Electrolux N.A., Inc.
Defendant
Sears Holding Corporation
Defendant
Sears, Roebuck and Co.
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DEXTER BARBOSA, 

Plaintiff, 

 v. 

 

SEARS HOLDING

CORPORATION, SEARS

ROEBUCK AND CO.,

ELECTROLUX N.A., INC., 

 Defendants. 

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CV 07-1792 LEW 

ORDER REMANDING ACTION TO

STATE COURT

Before the Court is Defendants’ “Notice of Removal

of Action.” This Notice of Removal is untimely.

Plaintiff’s complaint was filed in the Superior

Court of the State of California, San Joaquin County,

on July 13, 2007. Defendants Sears, Roebuck and Co.,

and Sears Holdings Corporation state that they received

a copy of Plaintiff’s complaint on July 30, 2007. 

Case 2:07-cv-01792-LEW-DAD Document 10 Filed 10/18/07 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

A Notice of Removal must be filed within 30 days of

receipt of the state complaint. 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b). 

The 30th day after receipt of the state complaint was 

August 29, 2007. Although Defendants’ Notice of

Removal was dated August 29, it was not filed with this

Court until 3:36 P.M. on August 30, 2007. 

This Court has no discretion to permit an untimely

notice of removal. See United States ex rel. Walker v.

Gunn,511 F.2d 1024, 1026 (9th Cir. 1975) (“[T]he

statute, insofar as the time for removal is concerned,

is imperative and mandatory, must be strictly complied

with, and is to be narrowly construed.”).

 On October 17, 2007, Defendant filed a Notice of

Non-Opposition to the Court’s Order to Show Cause Why

Notice of Removal Should Not Be Rejected. 

Defendants have conceded that grounds do not exists to

maintain the action in Federal Court. 

Therefore, the action is hereby REMANDED to

Superior Court of California, County of San Joaquin

(CV033103). 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 

HONORABLE RONALD S.W. LEW

Senior, U.S. District Judge

DATED: October 18, 2007

Case 2:07-cv-01792-LEW-DAD Document 10 Filed 10/18/07 Page 2 of 2