First Northern Bank of Dixon et al v. David Hatanaka, et al
| First Northern Bank of Dixon |
| David Hatanaka and Candice Hatanaka |
| 2:2011cv02976 |
| November 8, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Yolo |
| Kendall J. Newman |
| Morrison C. England |
| Rent, Lease, and Ejectment |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1446 |
| None |
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
15
ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 12/16/11 ORDERING that the initial Scheduling Conference currently set for 4/5/12 is VACATED. IT IS RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's MOTION to REMAND 12 , 13 b e granted. Each party to bear their own costs and fees. This matter be remanded to the Superior Court of California, County of Yolo, on the grounds that his Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff's claims and that defendant' s Motion to Remand 1 was untimely. The Clerk be directed to serve a certified coy of this order on the Clerk of the Yolo County Superior Court, and reference the State Case number (UD11-2082) in the proof of service. And the Clerk vacate all dates in this case and close the case. These Findings and Recommendations are submitted to U.S. District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. Objections to these F&R's due within fourteen days. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
|
|
Filing
11
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 11/29/11; Plaintiff's ex parte application for an order shortening time (Dkt. No. 9), is granted. The undersigned shall hear plaintiff's motion to remand on December 15, 2011, at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 25. Defendants' opposition to plaintiff's motion to remand (Dkt. No. 10), if any, shall be filed on or before December 8, 2011 (seven days before the hearing). Plaintiff's reply briefing, if any, shall be filed on o r before December 12, 2011. While the undersigned will not be inclined to move the hearing date for plaintiff's motion to remand (Dkt. No. 10), which is now set for December 15, 2011, however, upon defendants' written request, the undersig ned may permit defendants' opposition to that motion to be filed fewer than seven days before that hearing date. Should defendants require additional time to prepare a written opposition to plaintiff's motion to remand (Dkt. No. 10), defendants must file a brief written request explaining the need for additional time.(Matson, R)
|
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 Eastern 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.
