California Department of Motor Vehicles v. Guancione

Background

Rosalie Guancione, representing herself, moved a proceeding from the California Department of Motor Vehicles’ administrative court to the federal district court. She relied on federal removal statutes, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441 and 1443. She also asserted a conspiracy claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 and alleged violations of the First, Fourth, Fifth, Seventh, and Fourteenth Amendments.

Guancione later filed requests to proceed without paying court fees, pause the proceedings, enter a default, and dismiss the DMV’s complaint. The opinion does not decide those requests.

Court’s analysis

The court explained that 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) permits removal of actions brought in a state court when a federal district court has original jurisdiction. It cited precedent holding that a state administrative agency is not a “state court” for this purpose, even when the agency conducts court-like proceedings. Because Guancione moved the DMV file from a state administrative agency rather than a state court, the court questioned whether federal removal jurisdiction existed.

Order

The court ordered Guancione to file a written response by Friday, October 21, 2022, explaining why the proceeding should not be sent back to the California DMV administrative court for lack of removal jurisdiction. The order stated that, if the DMV did not file a written response by the deadline, the clerk would be directed to return the proceeding to the DMV and close the federal case. The opinion is an order to show cause, not a final remand order. Judge Edward J. Davila signed the order.