Filing # 57585937 E-Filed 06/09/2017 08:35:17 PM Tomas Sr wwreaumim UOLUMTEML L Enlered on FLSD Docket 06/09/9017 Psy fot 4 : ae] IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIALCIRCUIT FIRST AMERICAN BANK, as Case No.: 50-2016-CA-009292 successor by merger to Bank of Coral Gables, LLC, : DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL AND REMAND TO THE Plaintift : UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN : DISTRICT OF FLORIDA s. LAURENCE SCHNEIDER, STEPHANIE L. SCHNEIDER, et. Al. Defendants TO PLAINTIFF AND ALL OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendants Laurence Schneider and Stephanie L SCHNEIDER, /n Pro Per, notices this matter to be remanded to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, as the Circuit Court does not hold jurisdiction over the claim(s) and allegation(s) presented, and in support would state the following to-wit: A, REMOVAL IS APPLICABLE HERE Defendants filed a Federal District Court Complaint, regarding a Federal Question raised by Plaintiff in this matter during the scope of litigation. Defendants filed an FDCPA and FRCA Complaint to recover within said Court and requests that this ease be remanded to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, as they now hold jurisdiction, "30" ExhiMN OGIOWZOIT Page 2 of 4 Case 927-¢v-0723-DM Document Entered on FLSD Dod Defendants request this court close the above captioned case, and remand and redirect i110 the United States District Coun for the Souther District of Florida as a matter of law, This notice is conjunctively being filed in the District Court, B. STANDARD OF REVIEW. ‘The Federal Courts Jurisdiction and Venue Clarification Act of 2011 (the “Act”), signed into lew on December 7, 2011, became effective January 6, 2012. It applies to any case either ‘commenced in federsl coun or removed to federal court and “commenced,” as determined under State law. ‘The Act amends certain jurisdictional and venue-related provisions of the United States Code, including substantially modifying the procedures for removing cases to federal court. In the Instant case, and based on the diversity of the parties, meets all the criteria for both removal and remand. According to the Judiciary Committee Report on the Act, the changes made by the Act were developed and based on the recommendation of the United States Judicial Conference to adress the belief, expressed by judges, that “the current rules force them to waste time determining jurisdictional issues atthe expense of adjudicating underlying litigation.” [Report 112-10. p. 2.) The Act was intended to “bring” more clarity to the operation of Federal jurisdictional statutes and facilitate the identification of the appropriate State or federal court where actions should be brought.” Id, To that end, the Act contains both “jurisdictional improvements,” altering the basis for... diversity jurisdiction and modifying the procedures for removing cases to federal ‘our, and “venue and transfer improvements,” altering the determination of proper venue and eiving courts discretion to allow for an agreed-upon transfer to a particular forum.SOOO HO2C DMM Dennen h Prtered an bES0 Backat 0b/00201 7 Page d aba Huis ease meets tus lis tes nicoversy I. the Act aspis new proceatutes for estat bing the ain hecessary to sustain diversity jurisdiction, New Section MM¥6(e) provides that “the sum ¢ amount in controversy.” cain: shall be deemed to be 1 lomanded in good faith in the initial p ‘except in certain circumstances, The Act allows a defendant's notice of removal to establish the amount in controversy ifthe “inital pleading secks (i) nonmonetary relief or (i) a money judgment, but the State practice either does not permit denund for a specific sinn oF permits recovery of damages in exeess of the 103(b) (3) (C). Further, the Act defines the standard of proof Sect amount demanded.’ imposed on a defendant attempting to establish the amount in controversy. Under new Section ntroversy exceeds the 1446(c) (2) (B), the district court must determine that the amount in juvisdictional minimum "by the preponderance of the evidence.” I that information collected during state-court discovery may be Finally, the Act makes e! used to support removal even if removal is not appropriate based on the initial pleading. See Section 103(6)(3XC) (adopting new Section 1446(¢)(3)(A), which provides that “[i}f the case stated by the initial pleading is not removable solely because the amount in controversy does not exceed the amount specified in section 1332(a), information relating to the amount in controversy in the record of the State procceding, or in responses to discovery, shall be treated as According to the Judiciary Report on the Act, these ‘un “other paper’ under subsection (b)3} Procedures were intended to “address issues relating to uncertainty of the amount in controversy ‘hen removal is sought,” including resolving a circuit split regarding the burden of showing that the amount in controversy is satisfied. See Report 112-10, p. 15,Case 8:17-€V-60723-DMM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/09/2017 Page 4 of 4 ‘Thied, while retai 1g the requirement that a notice of removal based on traditional diversity jurisdiction be filed no later than one year after an action is commenced, the Act allows defendant to avoid the one-year bar by demonstrating that the “plaintiff has acted in bad faith in ‘order to prevent u defendant from removing the action.” See Section 103(b) (3) (C). As an ‘example of such bad faith, the Act expressly allows a defendant to remove a case following one year if “the district court finds that the plaintiff deliberately failed to disclose the actual amount in controversy to prevent removal.” Id. Here Defendants again meet the test for removal and remanding the proceedings to the United States District Court for the Souther District of Florida based on the foregoing. CONCLUSION For the above and foregoing reasons set forth, Defendants respectfully request that the Court remand these proceedings to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, and any such other relief as the Court deems needed, Respectfully Submitted this 9" Day of June 2017 mane SCHNEIDER, Pro Se 360 Coconut Palm Rd, Boca Raton, FL 33432 Jarry @sacapitalpartners.comCMIECF - Live Database - flad Page | of 2 DLB U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida (West Palm Beach) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 9:17-cv-80723-DMM Internal Use Only First American Bank v. Schneider et al ‘Assigned to: Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks Referred to: Magistrate Judge Deve Lee Brannon Case in other court: 15th Judicial Circuit, 51-12614-C 009292 Cause: 08:1446 Petition for Naturalization Hearing Plaintiff First American Bank represented by Henry H. Bolz IIT as successor by merger to Lank of Keller & Bolz Coral Gables, LLC Email: hbolz @kellerbolz.com LEAD ATIORSET ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Vv. Defendant Laurence Schneider represented by Laurence Schneider 360 Coconut Palm Road Boca Raton, FL 33432 PROSE Defendant represented by Stephanie Schneider 360 Coconut Palm Road Boca Raton, FL 33432 PROSE Date Filed | # | Docket Text 06/09/2017 Clerks Notice of Receipt of Filing Fee received on 6/9/2017 in the amount of $.400, receipt number FLS90005126 (rms1) (Entered: 06/09/2017) 06/09/2017 Clerks Notice pursuant to 28 USC 636(c). Parties are hereby notified that the U.S. Magistrate Judge Dave Lee Brannon is available to handle any or all hitps:/ecf.flsd.circ] | den/egi-bin/DktRptpl?405809891445789-L_1_0-1 6/9/2017CMECF - Live Database = tlsd Page 2 of 2 proceedings int Wagreat parties should complete aind ile the attached form. Iris not nevessary (9 file a docuntent inativating lack of eonsent (rmst) (Entered: 0609 2017) foe 06/09/2017 2 | Judge Assignment to Judge Donald M, Middlebmoks and Magistrate Judge Dave Lee Brannon (rmst) (Enterats 06 0 2017) NOTICE OF REMOVAL (STATE COURT COMPLAINT) Filing fees: $400.00 Receipt#: FLS90QQ0S 126, tiled by Stephanie Schneider, Laurence: Schneider. (Attachmeat Sxhibit State Cotttt Does, = 2 Civil Cover Sheet) (rrast) (Enteret: 06.09 2017) 06/09/2017 hutps://ecf-flsd.ciret 1.den/cgi-bin/DktRpt pl 05809891 44S78%L_t_O-t 6@Ni?