U.S. Bank National Association v. Papazian

Background

U.S. Bank National Association filed an unlawful-detainer action in Monterey County Superior Court against Jerry Taylor, Sara Taylor, and Aaron Papazian. U.S. Bank alleged that the defendants failed to vacate a property in Salinas, California. Papazian filed a notice removing the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on December 29, 2023.

The court issued an order requiring Papazian to explain why the case should not be returned to state court. The order did not finally remand the case.

Issues Identified by the Court

Federal-question jurisdiction. Federal-question jurisdiction generally exists when a federal issue appears on the face of the plaintiff’s properly pleaded complaint. The court explained that a defendant’s anticipated federal defense normally cannot create federal jurisdiction. Here, U.S. Bank’s complaint asserted a single California unlawful-detainer claim, which does not arise under federal law. Papazian relied on the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009, but the court stated that U.S. Bank did not mention that statute in its complaint and that Papazian had not identified where the alleged reference appeared. The court ordered Papazian to clearly explain why federal jurisdiction exists.

Consent by all defendants. For a removal under the general removal statute, all properly joined and served defendants must join in or consent to removal. The court found Papazian’s notice unclear because it sometimes referred to only one defendant, while also stating that all defendants consented. The notice contained only Papazian’s name and signature. The court ordered him to explain whether each defendant consented.

Timeliness. A notice of removal generally must be filed within 30 days after the defendant receives the initial pleading. Papazian stated only that his notice was timely. The court noted that the papers suggested the deadline might have expired: U.S. Bank filed its first amended complaint on August 24, 2023; Papazian served his answer on November 17, 2023; and he filed the notice of removal on December 29, 2023. The court ordered him to explain how the notice was timely in light of those dates.

Order

The court ordered Papazian to respond in writing to all three issues by January 26, 2024. It cautioned that, if the case had to be remanded, Papazian could be required to pay the costs and actual expenses, including attorney fees, resulting from the removal. Judge Nathanael M. Cousins also provided information about the Federal Pro Se Program, but the order did not state that Papazian was proceeding without a lawyer.

Disposition

The court issued an order to show cause concerning possible remand. It did not grant or deny remand in this order.