Romero, et al., v. CitiMortgage, Inc. et al
Filing
56
MEMORANDUM and ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 3/26/10: The Court dismisses Defendants CitiMortgage, Inc. and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. in its capacity as nominee/beneficiary of Plaintiffs' CitiMortage-administered Deed of Trust. The suit brought against Defendants is REMANDED to Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento. The Clerk is directed to terminate the Defendants. (Kaminski, H)
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 INDYMAC FEDERAL BANK; CITIMORTGAGE; SECURITY MORTGAGE FUNDING CORP.; QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORP.; ONEWEST BANK, FSB; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.; HUONG LO; and DOES 1-20 INCLUSIVE, Defendants. ----oo0oo---Through the present action, Plaintiffs Jorge Romero and Lucia Orozco ("Plaintiffs") seek monetary and injunctive relief from Defendants CitiMortgage, Inc. and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. in its capacity as nominee/beneficiary of Plaintiffs' CitiMortage-administered Deed of Trust (collectively "Defendants") for a litany of state and federal claims arising out of Plaintiffs' financing of their home in 2006. 1 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER JORGE ROMERO and LUCIA OROZCO, No. 2:09-cv-02889-MCE-DAD UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
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
Presently before the Court is a Motion by Defendants to Dismiss the claims alleged against them in Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Additionally, Defendants move to strike portions of
Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(f).1 As alleged against Defendants, Plaintiffs' only federal cause of action is for violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ("RESPA"), 12 U.S.C. § 2605. However, Plaintiffs'
Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Dismiss specifically concedes this point and respectfully requests that the RESPA claim be dismissed. Plaintiffs are cautioned against filing a complaint in this Court and then dismissing the federal claims as soon as a Motion to Dismiss is filed. Nonetheless, with only state law claims
remaining, this Court ceases to have subject matter jurisdiction over the Plaintiffs' suit as alleged against Defendants. The
Court declines to exercise its supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state causes of action and they are dismissed without prejudice. The Court need not address the merits of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 21) as those issues are now moot. Similarly, Defendants' Motion to Strike (Docket No. 23) is DENIED as moot.
Because oral argument will not be of material assistance, the Court orders this matter submitted on the briefs. E.D. Cal. Local Rule 230(g). 2
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
For the reasons stated above, the Court dismisses Defendants CitiMortgage, Inc. and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. in its capacity as nominee/beneficiary of Plaintiffs' CitiMortage-administered Deed of Trust. The suit brought against
Defendants is REMANDED to Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento. The Clerk is directed to terminate the Defendants.
IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 26, 2010
_____________________________ MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
