Becerra v. Allstate Northbrook Indemnity Company

• Court: District Court, S.D. California
• Decided: March 29, 2022
• Docket: 3:22-cv-00202
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 STEFANIE BECERRA, Case No. 22-cv-0202-BAS-MSB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING DEFENDANT 13 v. TO RESPOND TO COMPLAINT

14 ALLSTATE NORTHBROOK

INDEMNITY COMPANY, 15 Defendant. 16

18 Defendant removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County 19 of San Diego the instant action on February 14, 2022. (Notice of Removal, ECF No. 1; 20 Compl., Ex. A to Notice of Removal, ECF No. 1-2.) 21 It is well-settled that upon arrival in federal court, a complaint in state court becomes 22 subject to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rules”) as though it had been initially 23 filed in federal district court. See Labertew v. Langemeier, 846 F.3d 1028 (9th Cir. 2017); 24 but see Istituto Per Lo Sviluppo Economico Dell’ Italia Meridonale v. Sperti Prods., Inc., 25 47 F.R.D. 310, 312–13 (S.D.N.Y. 1969) (“Only pleadings filed subsequent to removal must 26 conform to the requirements of the federal rules.”). As a general matter, the Rules “do not 27 require repleading when an action is removed from state court.” Lally v. Allstate Ins. Co., 28 724 F. Supp. 760, 763 (S.D. Cal. 1989); see Rule 81(c)(1) (“After removal, repleading is 1 ||unnecessary unless the court orders it.”). However, where the defendant did not answer 2 ||the complaint prior to removal, the defendant must “answer or present other defenses or 3 || objections under these [R]ules” either “(A) 21 days after receiving—through service or 4 || otherwise—a copy of the initial pleading stating the claim for relief; (B) 21 days after being 5 || served with the summons for an initial pleading on file at the time of service; or (C) 7 days 6 || after the notice of removal is filed,” whichever period is longest. 7 Here, Defendant did not file an answer to the state court complaint, but instead filed 8 |}a demurrer on October 26, 2021, in state court. (Demurrer to Compl., Ex. C to Notice of 9 || Removal, ECF No. 1-4.) A demurrer is not equivalent to an “answer” in federal court for 10 || purposes of Rule 81(c)(2). See, e.g., Great Am. ins. Co. v. Air New Zealand Ltd., No. 2:19- 11 || cv-3324-AB-MRWx, 2019 WL 7971888, at *3 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 22, 2019) (citing Witkowsky 12 Home Depot, U.S.A., Inc., No. 09-06486, 2009 WL 10673595, at *3 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 30, 13 |}2009)). Hence, the Rules mandate that Defendant file a responsive pleading in the instant 14 || proceeding. Because each of the periods to respond to the Complaint specified in Rule 15 81(c)(2) have elapsed without Defendant’s submission of a responsive pleading, Defendant 16 ||is ORDERED to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint by no later than April 17 |} 18, 2022. 18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 || DATED: March 29, 2022 ( itl A (Liphan 6 20 United States District Judge 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28