Rosenberg v. Shemiran Co. LLC
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-00229
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Rosenberg v. Shemiran Co. LLC, Chief Judge McMahon denied reconsideration because sending the case back to state court ended federal jurisdiction.
Rudy Rosenberg, who represented himself, and the parties involved in the underlying state-court action. The federal case was closed after the court denied Rosenberg’s motions.
What happened
Rudy Rosenberg, representing himself, tried to move a pending state-court case to federal court and asked to proceed anonymously. Chief Judge McMahon previously denied anonymity and sent the case back to state court because removal was improper.
Rosenberg later filed two motions seeking clarification, reconsideration, orders stopping the remand, and sanctions against the state-court plaintiffs. He argued that the court had not addressed several of his claims and that he had not received copies of some filed orders.
Chief Judge McMahon denied Rosenberg’s motions because the case had already been sent back to state court, leaving the federal court without jurisdiction to act further. The court ordered that Rosenberg receive the docket sheet, closed the federal case, and denied him permission to appeal without paying fees.
The detailed version
- Rosenberg v. Shemiran Co. LLC · No. 1:20-cv-00229
- Colleen McMahon
- June 30, 2020
Background
Rudy Rosenberg, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a notice seeking to remove a pending state-court action to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The opinion states that Rosenberg was the defendant in the state-court action and remained the defendant after removal, despite styling himself as the plaintiff in the federal filing. He also asked to proceed anonymously, although he had been identified by name in the state-court proceedings.
In an earlier order dated February 3, 2020, the court denied Rosenberg’s request to proceed anonymously and sent the case back to state court because removal was improper. The case was sent back on February 4, 2020. Rosenberg then filed two motions in May and June 2020, each styled as a request for an order to show cause, clarification, reconsideration, and a temporary restraining order.
Rosenberg’s Requests
Rosenberg sought reconsideration of the ruling that removal was improper. He argued that the court had failed to decide most of his legally supportable claims and described the remand order as fraudulent. He also sought an order stopping the case from being sent back to state court and sanctions against the state-court plaintiffs. In addition, he said he had not received copies of some orders filed in the case.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that sending a case back to state court ends the federal district court’s jurisdiction over that case. It further stated that such a remand order cannot be reconsidered by the district court. Once the federal court certifies the remand, it cannot take further action in the case.
Because this case had already been sent back to state court, the court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to take any further action.
Disposition
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon denied Rosenberg’s motions, identified as ECF Nos. 8 and 9, because the case had already been remanded and the court lacked jurisdiction to act further. The court directed the Clerk of Court to mail Rosenberg the order and a copy of the docket sheet, and to record service on the docket. The federal case was closed, and the court stated that it would accept further filings in the action only if they were directed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied Rosenberg permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.