United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division
ANTHONY D. CUMMINGS, Plaintiff,
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
WILLIAM S. DUFFEY, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
matter is before the Court on Defendant Nationstar Mortgage
LLC's (“Defendant” or
“Nationstar”) Motion to Dismiss  Plaintiff
Anthony D. Cummings' (“Plaintiff”) Complaint
[1.1]. The Court also considers Plaintiff's
“Emergency Motion for Entry to Reconsider Order to
Remand Case Back to State Court, Motion to Vacate Remand
Order with Supplemental of [sic] Jurisdiction”
(“Motion to Remand”) , which the Court
construes as his Motion to Remand.
October 31, 2006, Plaintiff obtained a loan in the amount of
$189, 370 from Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA”).
(Security Deed [3.2] at 2, 4).Repayment of the loan was secured
by a deed (“Security Deed”) to real property
located at 3159 Meadow Point Drive, Snellville, Georgia (the
“Property”). (Id. at 5). Under the terms
of the Security Deed, Plaintiff “grant[ed] and
convey[ed] to [BANA] and [BANA's] successors and assigns,
with power of sale, the [Property].” (Id.).
14, 2016, BANA assigned its rights under the Security Deed to
Nationstar. (Assignment [3.3]).
point, it appears that Plaintiff defaulted on his loan
obligations and Nationstar scheduled a foreclosure sale of
January 25, 2016, Plaintiff filed his Complaint in the
Superior Court of Gwinnett County, Georgia. The crux of
Plaintiff's claims is that Defendant lacks standing to
foreclose on the Property based on perceived defects in the
Assignment and the transfer of his mortgage. Plaintiff seeks
injunctive relief, compensatory and punitive damages,
attorney's fees and litigation costs.
15, 2016, Nationstar removed the Gwinnett County Action to
this Court based on diversity of citizenship pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1332.
22, 2016, Nationstar moved to dismiss Plaintiff's
Complaint for failure to state a claim for relief.
August 3, 2016, Plaintiff filed his “Verified Motion,
Improper Foreclosure, Injunctive Relief, Punitive Damages,
[sic] Remand Back to Superior Court.” In it, Plaintiff
asserts that Nationstar lacks standing to foreclose on the
Property because it is an “improper secured
creditor” and has not produced the original promissory
note. (See  at 2).
September 29, 2016, Plaintiff filed his “Motion”
 for Injunctive Relief. Plaintiff also appears to assert a
claim for fraud based on his assertion that Nationstar
“has never proven entitlement to the plaintiff property
[sic], ” which, he asserts, amounts to “a clear
pattern of intentional fraudulent conduct.”
(See  at 4).
December 27, 2016, Plaintiff moved to remand this case to
state court. Plaintiff does not assert any specific reasons
to explain why remand of this action is appropriate.
Plaintiff does not assert that the Court lacks subject-matter
jurisdiction over this action and instead seems to agree that
the “District Court of the United States has original,
concurrent, and supplementary [sic] jurisdiction over this
cause of action.” (See  at 2).
Court first considers whether it has subject-matter
jurisdiction over this action.
Plaintiff's Motion to Remand
removed the Gwinnett County Action to this Court based on
diversity of citizenship. The Court has diversity
jurisdiction over an action in which the amount in
controversy exceeds $75, 000, and is ...