Kendra L. Miranda v. Bank of America NA et al
| Kendra L. Miranda |
| Does, Bayview Loan Servicing LLC and Bank of America NA |
| 2:2014cv00590 |
| January 24, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Margaret M. Morrow |
| Alka Sagar |
| Banks and Banking |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
5
MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) Order to Show Cause Why Action Should Not Be Remanded for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction by Judge Margaret M. Morrow: Kendra Miranda filed this action on December 19, 2013 against Bank of America, N.A. ("Bank of America"), Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC ("Bayview"), and certain fictitious defendants in San Luis Obispo Superior Court.........Defendants have not adequately alleged the existence of diversity jurisdiction, the onlypurported ground f or the exercise of subject matter jurisdiction in this case. Accordingly, the court orders defendants to show cause on or before February 18, 2014 why the action should not be remanded to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Failure t o respond by February 18, 2014 will result in immediate remand of the action. If defendants file a response to this order, Miranda may file a reply no later than February 25, 2014. (PLEASE REVIEW DOCUMENT FOR FULL AND COMPLETE DETAILS) ( Response to Order to Show Cause due by 2/18/2014.) (lw)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
