(PC) Roman v. Smith ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ISIDRO ROMAN, No. 1:23-cv-00847-ADA-BAM (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS TO REMAND 13 v. ACTION TO STATE COURT 14 SMITH, (ECF No. 4) 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff Isidro Roman (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this action. On 18 June 2, 2023, Plaintiff filed a notice of removal of this action from the Court of Appeal of the State 19 of California, Fifth Appellate District, Case No. F085571 (Tuolumne County Superior Court, Case 20 No. CV63312). (ECF No. 1.) 21 On June 2, 2023, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations that 22 this action be remanded to the Court of Appeal of the State of California, Fifth Appellate District, 23 Case No. F085571 (Tuolumne County Superior Court, Case No. CV63312). (ECF No. 4.) The 24 findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice that any objections 25 were to be filed within fourteen days after service. (Id. at 2.) On June 20, 2023, Plaintiff timely 26 filed objections to the findings and recommendations. (ECF No. 6.) Defendant did not file 27 objections, and the deadline to do so has expired. 28 Plaintiff chose to file this action in state court. As the plaintiff, he has no right to remove 1 | the same action to federal court. Am. Int’l Underwriters (Phil.), Inc. v. Cont’l Ins. Co., 843 F.2d 2 | 1253, 1260 (9th Cir. 1988) (“The right to remove a state court case to federal court is clearly limited 3 | to defendants.”); In re Walker, 375 F.2d 678, 678 (9th Cir. 1967) (“No right exists in favor of a 4 | person who, as plaintiff, has filed an action in the state court, to cause the removal of such action 5 || to a federal court.”’). 6 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a 7 | de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, including □□□□□□□□□□□ 8 | objections, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by 9 | proper analysis. 10 Accordingly, 11 1. The findings and recommendations issued on June 2, 2023, (ECF No. 4), are adopted in 12 full; 13 2. This action is remanded to the Court of Appeal of the State of California, Fifth Appellate 14 District, Case No. F085571 (Tuolumne County Superior Court, Case No. CV63312); 15 and 16 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 17 18 19 | IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 Dated: _ September 5, 2023 UNITED fTATES DISTRICT JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28