United States District Court, D. Maryland
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Xinis United States District Judge
August 30, 2018, Defendant Sheila Faine, pro se,
removed this foreclosure action from the Circuit Court for
Prince George's County, Maryland. ECF No. 1. Defendant
did not file all documents from state court, nor has
Defendant complied with the Court's order requiring the
submission of information concerning removal, including the
date on which Defendant was served. ECF No. 3. Indeed, no
party has taken any action in federal Court in the
two-and-a-half months since it was removed.
court actions that originally could have been brought in
federal court may be removed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1441. Caterpillar, Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386,
392 (1987); Mulcahey v. Columbia Organic Chems. Co.,
29 F.3d 148, 151 (4th Cir. 1994). The defendant, as removing
party, bears the burden of “demonstrating the
court's jurisdiction over the matter.” Strawn
v. AT&T Mobility, LLC, 530 F.3d 293, 296 (4th Cir.
2008). Federal courts construe removal statutes strictly and
resolve all doubts in favor of remand. See Md. Stadium
Auth. v. Ellerbe Becket, Inc., 407 F.3d 255, 260 (4th
U.S.C. § 1446 governs the procedure for removal. The
defendant has “30 days after receipt by or service on
that defendant of the initial pleading or summons” to
remove the case. § 1446(b)(2)(B). Upon removal, the
defendant must file “a copy of all process, pleadings,
and orders served upon such defendant.” § 1446(a).
By local rule, thirty days after removal, the defendant must
also file all state court documents-not just documents served
upon the defendant-along with a certification “that all
filings in the state court action have been filed in the
United States District Court.” Loc. R.
failure to comply with § 1446 is not a jurisdictional
defect, it “is grounds for immediately remanding a
removed case to state court.” FHC Options, Inc. v.
Sec. Life Ins. Co. of Am., 993 F.Supp. 378, 380 (E.D.
Va. 1998); see also Davis v. Rutherford, No.
2:09-CV-00096, 2009 WL 2599329, at *6 (S.D. W.Va. May 19,
2009), adopted in relevant part, 2009 WL 2599328, at
*4 (S.D. W.Va. Aug. 20, 2009). Furthermore, the Court has
inherent authority to enforce the local rules and court
orders, and may fashion any appropriate sanction, including
civil contempt of court and case-dispositive sanctions.
Iota Xi Chapter of Sigma Chi Fraternity v.
Patterson, 566 F.3d 138, 150 (4th Cir. 2009);
Enovative Techs., LLC v. Leor, 110 F.Supp.3d 633,
637 (D. Md. 2015).
has failed to comply with Local Rule 103.5.a by not filing
all other documents on file with state court as of removal.
Defendant also failed to comply with the Court's Order at
ECF No. 3. Because of these failures, the Court is unable to
determine whether Defendant removed this action in accordance
with § 1446. Nor can the Court determine whether an
ongoing case or controversy still exists. Evidently, the
substitute trustee has filed a notice of voluntary dismissal
in state court subsequent to the action's removal. Notice
of Voluntary Dismissal, Cohn v. Faine, No.
CAEF18-14640 (Md. Cir. Ct. for Prince George's Cty. Sept.
18 2018), ECF No. 12. Although the state court's
dismissal is likely void because the action had already been
removed to this Court, Ackerman v. ExxonMobile
Corp., 734 F.3d 237, 249 (4th Cir. 2013), the notice
suggests that subsequent events may have mooted this case,
and thus deprived this court of jurisdiction in any event.
See Incumaa v. Ozmint, 507 F.3d 281, 286 (4th Cir.
2007) (court retains jurisdiction to hear only ongoing cases
it is ORDERED that Defendant show good cause within 21 days
from the date of this order as to why the Court should not
take further adverse action, to include remanding this case
to state court or dismissing the action for failure to comply
with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Local Rules, or
this Court's Order.
 Local Rule 103.5.a provides, in
Any party effecting removal shall file with the notice
true and legible copies of all process, pleadings, documents,
and orders which have been served upon that party. Within
thirty (30) days thereafter the party shall file true and
legible copies of all other documents then on file in the
state court, together with a certification from counsel that
all filings in the state court action have been filed in the
United States District Court. In cases subject to electronic
filing, the copies shall be filed in accordance with the
electronic filing procedures adopted by the Court.