Yan v. Vdovicenco, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California grants Weiqing Yan’s motion to remand an unlawful detainer action to Alameda County Superior Court. The court concludes that the second removal was untimely and that the defendant’s reliance on the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act as a defense or counterclaim did not establish federal-question jurisdiction; the court awards Yan $1,800 in attorney’s fees.

Holdings

1. The second removal was untimely because Defendant had received the complaint more than thirty days before filing the November 20, 2025 notice of removal.
2. The court lacked federal-question jurisdiction because Plaintiff's complaint asserted only a California unlawful-detainer claim and did not present a federal question on its face.
3. The action had to be remanded to Alameda County Superior Court because Defendant failed to establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction.
4. Plaintiff was entitled to attorney's fees because the second removal lacked an objectively reasonable basis, but the requested amount was reduced to $1,800.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Defendant's second removal was timely under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b).
2. Whether the state-law unlawful-detainer complaint presented a federal question sufficient to support federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
3. Whether Plaintiff was entitled to attorney's fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), and if so, in what amount.

Disposition

remanded