Richards v. United Dominion Realty Trust, Inc. ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 LARRY RICHARDS, et al., Case No. 19-cv-08100-SI 8 Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR 9 v. TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER 10 UNITED DOMINION REALTY TRUST, Re: Dkt. No. 2 INC., et al., 11 Defendants. 12 13 14 On December 11, 2019, pro se plaintiffs Larry Richards and Fantasia Brown filed a 15 complaint and motion for a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) and order to show cause why a 16 preliminary injunction not issue against (1) United Dominion Realty Trust, Inc. d/b/a UDR Towers 17 By The Bay, LLC, (2) Dr. Benjamin Solomon Carson Sr. in his capacity as Secretary of the United 18 States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), (3) Wayne Sauseda, in his 19 capacity as HUD Deputy Regional Administrator, (4) Barbara Smith, in her capacity as Acting 20 Executive Director of the San Francisco Housing Authority, (5) Sarah Ramler, in her capacity as 21 Director of Leased Housing, (6) San Francisco Mayor London Breed in her official capacity, and 22 (7) various other individual defendants. Dkt. Nos. 1 (“Complaint”) and 2 (“TRO App”). In their 23 request for a TRO, plaintiffs ask that “this Honorable Court take immediate jurisdiction over San 24 Francisco Superior Court case number CUD-18-662405,” a pending unlawful detainer action. TRO 25 App at 1. 26 Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and are presumptively without jurisdiction. 27 Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). Federal courts have original 1 States,” 28 U.S.C. § 1331, and over “all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the 2 || sum or value of $75,000 . . . and is between citizens of different states,” 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). 3 Both Mr. Richards and Ms. Brown reside in San Francisco, California and do not assert 4 || diversity jurisdiction. Complaint at 32. Rather, plaintiffs assert jurisdiction is proper “pursuant to 5 $§ 1343) and 1331 and 2201, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(e), and 5 U.S.C. § 7[.]” Jd. In their ex parte 6 || motion, plaintiffs request this Court take jurisdiction of San Francisco Court Case CUD-18-662405, 7 an unlawful detainer action. TRO App at 10. However, the United States Code sections plaintiffs 8 cite do not confer federal question subject matter jurisdiction over unlawful detainer actions — nor 9 is the Court aware of any independent basis for jurisdiction over this matter. As such, this Court 10 || cannot grant plaintiffs’ requested relief and therefore DENIES the ex parte motion and application 11 for a temporary restraining order. 12 IT IS SO ORDERED. Sian Debate © 15 Dated: December 12, 2019 2 SUSAN ILLSTON a 16 United States District Judge = 17 Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28