United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Tacoma
ORDER RENOTING MOTION TO REMAND AND ORDER TO SHOW
J. BRYAN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
MATTER comes before the Court on the Plaintiff's Motion
for Remand opposing Defendants' Notice of Removal. Dkt.
12. The Court has considered the pleadings filed regarding
the motion and the remaining file.
filed in Kitsap County, Washington Superior Court, this case
arises from a mortgage and deed of trust on property commonly
known as 11700 Carriage Place SE, Olalla, Washington. Dkt.
1-3. Defendants Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, d/b/a
Christiana Trust, a trustee for Pretium Mortgage Acquisition
Trust (“Wilmington”) and Selene Finance LP
(“Selene) removed the case to this Court based on the
federal question asserted in the Amended Complaint, pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Dkt. 1. Defendant Quality Loan
Service Corp. of Washington (“Quality Loan”) was
not a removing defendant according to the Notice of Removal.
Id. The Plaintiff now moves to remand the case,
asserting that removal was improper. Dkt. 12.
case was originally filed in state court on May 15, 2017 and
asserted only state law claims for quiet title and for
violations of Washington's Consumer Protection Act. RCW
19.86, et. seq. Meppelink v. Wilmington Savings
Fund Society, SSB, et. al., Kitsap County, Washington
Superior Court case number 17-2-00839-9; filed in this case
at Dkt. 13-1, at 1 and 6-17.
May 17, 2019 Order granting the Plaintiff's Motion for
Leave to Amend the Complaint, the Plaintiff was ordered to
“file the amended complaint with the court by June 15,
2019.” Dkt. 14, at 24. She was further ordered to
“serve the Defendants with the amended complaint,
pursuant to the rules of the court for service of process by
June 30, 2019.” Id.
11, 2019, the Plaintiff filed an “Amended Complaint Re:
Claims for Wrongful Foreclosure Violation of Regulation X of
[the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act
(“RESPA”)] (12 U.S.C. § 2601, et.
seq.) Declaratory Relief and Damages” in the
Kitsap County, Washington Superior Court. Dkt. 13-3, at
91-204. The Plaintiff's “Declaration of
Mailing” states that she sent the Defendants a copy of
an Amended Summons and the Amended Complaint to the
Defendants on June 24, 2019. Dkt. 13-3, at 207-208.
Wilmington and Selene's counsel acknowledges that they
received the Amended Complaint on June 26, 2019. Dkt. 1, at
17, 2019, Defendants Wilmington and Selene removed the case
to this Court based on federal question jurisdiction. Dkt. 1.
It does not appear that Defendant Quality Loan joined in, or
consented to, the removal. It is represented by counsel and
has filed a Corporate Disclosure Statement on July 23, 2019.
Plaintiff moves to remand the case. Dkt. 12. Defendants
Wilmington and Selene oppose the motion. Dkt. 14. Defendant
Quality Loan did not respond to the motion to remand.
of a case from a state court to a United States District
Court is governed by the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §§
1441 and 1446. Section 1441 provides, in relevant part, as
Except as otherwise expressly provided by Act of congress,
any civil action brought in a State court of which the
district courts of the United States have original
jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant or defendants,
to the district court of the United States for the district
and division embracing the place where such action is
pending. . .
28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). “[R]emoval statutes are
construed narrowly in favor of remand to protect the
jurisdiction of the state courts.” Harris v.
Bankers Life and Cas. Co.,425 F.3d 689, 698 (9th Cir.
2005). “The party seeking removal bears the burden of
establishing federal ...