1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 FREDERICK E. TINSLEY, Case No. 24-cv-05673-JD 8 Plaintiff, ORDER RE REMAND 9 v. 10 DONALD GLAUDE, et al., ll Defendants. 12 Defendants Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. and Deutsche Bank National Trust Co.’s 5 13 motions to remand, see Dkt. Nos. 6, 15, are granted. On the face of the complaint, it is S 14 || questionable whether there exists a basis for removal jurisdiction pursuant to diversity or federal- 3 15 question jurisdiction. See

(b), (c); Franchise Tax Bd. v. Constr. Laborers a 16 Vacation Trust for Southern Cali.,

(1983); see also Fed. R. Ev. 201(b)(2); Callan v. 3 17 New York Community Bank, 643 Fed. App’x 666, 667 (9th Cir. 2016) (unpublished). In addition, 18 || defendant Donald Glaude filed a notice of removal on August 22, 2024, nearly two years after the 19 || date on which plaintiff Frederick Tinsley filed the operative complaint in state court. 20 Consequently, the motion is untimely. See 28 U.S.C. §§$ 1446(b)(3), (c). 21 The hearing set for October 31, 2024, is vacated. 2 IT IS SO ORDERED. 23 Dated: October 29, 2024 24 25 JAM ONATO 26 Uniteff States District Judge 27 28