1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 ESSEX PROPERTY TRUST, INC., Case No. 25-cv-07627-JD 5 Plaintiff, ORDER RE REPORT AND 6 v. RECOMMENDATION, AND REMAND 7 DANIEL POORE, et al., g Defendants. 9 Pro se defendants Daniel and Claudia Poore removed this unlawful detainer action from 10 || California state superior court. Dkt. No. 1. A magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation 11 advising remand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Dkt. No. 8. No objections have been filed 12 || in response to the report, and the time to file objections has expired. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). 5 13 Removal was said to be based on federal question jurisdiction under the CARES Act, 14 || which defendants mentioned as a defense to the eviction action. See Dkt. No. 1. The report and 3 15 |} recommendation concluded that a federal defense is not a basis of removal. Dkt. No. 8 at 3 (citing a 16 || Provincial Gov’t of Marinduque v. Placer Dome, Inc.,

(9th Cir. 2009)). The 3 17 || same goes for the other federal defenses defendants identified. As noted in the report, diversity 18 || jurisdiction is precluded by the forum defendant rule. Dkt. No. 8 at 3-4 (citing 19 ||

(b)). Consequently, the report and recommendation indicated that the case 20 || should be remanded. 21 After an independent review, the Court adopts the report and recommendation. The case is 22 || ordered remanded to the Superior Court of California for the County of Marin. All pending 23 || motions are terminated. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 Dated: November 19, 2025 26 7 JAMES PONATO United Plates District Judge 28