UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JS-6 / REMAND CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Case No. CV 23-2753-DMG (KSx) Date April 19, 2023

Title Nya Prude v. Andre Nesbit Page 1 of 2

Present: The Honorable DOLLY M. GEE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

KANE TIEN NOT REPORTED Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff(s) Attorneys Present for Defendant(s) None Present None Present

Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS—ORDER REMANDING ACTION TO STATE COURT

On April 12, 2023, Defendant Andre Nesbit removed this action from Illinois state court to this Court, invoking the Court’s federal question jurisdiction. [Doc. # 1.] This is Nesbit’s second attempt to remove this child custody action to federal court. See Prude v. Nesbit, Case No. CV 23-2066-DMG (KSx) [Doc. # 14 (March 29, 2023 Remand Order)].

In this second Notice of Removal, Nesbit purports to assert two claims for violation of his Fourteenth and Eighth Amendment rights, that arise out of the state court claims. A Notice of Removal is not the proper place to assert new claims arising out of the state court action. Nor does Nesbit’s assertion that the claims against him in the state court action violate his constitutional rights give rise to federal subject matter jurisdiction. “The presence or absence of federal-question jurisdiction is governed by the ‘well-pleaded complaint rule,’ which provides that federal jurisdiction exists only when a federal question is presented on the face of the plaintiff's properly pleaded complaint.” Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams,

(1987). “[A] case may not be removed to federal court on the basis of a federal defense.”

.

Nesbit has not established any basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction. For this reason, and for the reasons stated in the Court’s previous remand order, the Court REMANDS this action to the Circuit Court in Cook County, Illinois for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

The Court further warns Nesbit that although he is proceeding pro se, he is still subject to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules. See C.D. Cal. L.R. 83-2.2.3. Further frivolous removals of actions which clearly fail to state federal claims may result in the imposition of sanctions or other measures designed to discourage vexatious litigation under the Local Rules. See C.D. Cal. L.R. 83-7, 83-8.

Finally, Nesbit has once again filed documents that include the unredacted name of a minor. The Court therefore ORDERS the Clerk to seal the Notice of Removal. A redacted version of the same state court documents already appears on the docket in Nesbit’s previous UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JS-6 / REMAND CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Case No. CV 23-2753-DMG (KSx) Date April 19, 2023

Title Nya Prude v. Andre Nesbit Page 2 of 2

case. See Prude v. Nesbit, Case No. CV 23-2066-DMG (KSx) [Doc. # 8 (Notice of Removal attaching redacted state court documents)].

IT IS SO ORDERED.