THR California LP v. Doris Boykins et al, No. 5:2013cv00296 - Document 4 (C.D. Cal. 2013)

Court Description: MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Manuel L. Real. A district court must remand a case to state court if at any time before final judgment it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. 1447(c). Because this is an u nlawful detainer action, a federal question does not present itself. See Indymac Federal Bank, F.S.B. v. Ocampo, No. CV 09-2337, 2010 WL 234828, *2 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 13, 2010) (sua sponte remanding an action to state court for lack of subject matter j urisdiction where plaintiffs complaint contained only an unlawful detainer claim). As such, this case is now REMANDED TO STATE COURT. Also, the pro se individual who seems to have attempted this removal, Vada Everett Boykins, is not the named defenda nt in the underlying action and has no standing to do anything in this case; however, had defendant Doris Boykins herself attempted the removal, the result would be the same, the case would be remanded for the reasons as listed above. IT IS SO ORDERED AND REMANDED. Remanding case to San Bernardino County Superior Court, Case number UDFS1202220. (Case Terminated. Made JS-6.) (Attachments: # 1 Remand Letter CV-103) (kti)