Florence Walker v. State of California

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JS-6 CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Case No. EDCV 19-1652 JGB (KKx) Date September 5, 2019 Title Florence Walker v. State of California, et al.

Present: The Honorable JESUS G. BERNAL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

MAYNOR GALVEZ Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorney(s) Present for Plaintiff(s): Attorney(s) Present for Defendant(s): None Present None Present

Proceedings: Order (1) REMANDING Action to California Superior Court for the County of San Diego (IN CHAMBERS)

Before the Court is Defendants’ notice of removal. (“Notice,” Dkt. No. 1.) Both the Notice and attachments make clear that the action Defendants seek to remove originates in California Superior Court, County of San Diego. (Id. at 1; Dkt. No. 1-1.)

Removal jurisdiction is governed by statute. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441, 1446. Sections 1441(a) and 1446(a) list several requirements for removal jurisdiction, including that the removal be to the district and division embracing the place where such action is pending. Id. The Ninth Circuit applies a strong presumption against removal jurisdiction, ensuring “the defendant always has the burden of establishing that removal is proper.” Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992) (citing Nishimoto v. Federman-Bachrach & Assocs., 903 F.2d 709, 712 n.3 (9th Cir. 1990)); see also In re Ford Motor Co./Citibank, 264 F.3d 952, 957 (9th Cir. 2001) (“The party asserting federal jurisdiction bears the burden of proving the case is properly in federal court.”).

Defendants have not satisfied the requirements for removal to the Central District of California. The matter is pending before the Superior Court in San Diego County. (Notice at 1.) And the Southern District of California “comprises the counties of Imperial and San Diego.” 28 U.S.C. § 84. As a result, the Southern, not the Central, District embraces the place where the case is pending. “If it clearly appears on the face of the [Notice of Removal] and any exhibits annexed thereto that removal should not be permitted, the court shall make an order for summary remand.” 28 U.S.C. § 1446(c)(4). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(c)(4), the Court has examined the Notice of Removal and concludes that Defendants have not met their burden of establishing that the action is properly in this Court.

For the foregoing reasons, the Court REMANDS this action to Superior Court of California, County of San Diego.

IT IS SO ORDERED.