Kyle Bratschie v. Travelers Property Casualty Company of America

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. CV 21-04065 PA (JPRx) Date May 21, 2021 Title Kyle Bratschie v. Travelers Property Casualty Company of America

Present: The Honorable =PERCY ANDERSON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE K. Sali-Suleyman Not Reported N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter Tape No. Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants: None None Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS - COURT ORDER Before the Court is a Notice of Removal filed by defendant Travelers Property Casualty Company of America (“Defendant”). (Dtk. No. 1.) Defendant previously filed a Notice of Removal in this Court on March 5, 2021. (See Kyle Bratschie v, Travelers Property Casualty Company of America, 21-02041-PA (JPRx) (C.D. Cal.) Dkt. No. 1.) In the March 5, 2021 Notice of Removal, Defendant stated Defendant was “informed and believes Plaintiff is... a citizen of the United States and a citizen of either the State of California or South Carolina.” (Id.). On March 12, 2021, the Court found Defendant had failed to affirmatively allege Plaintiff's citizenship as required to show that this Court has diversity jurisdiction over this action, and remanded the case back Los Angeles Superior Court. (Dkt. No. 7.) On April 8, 2021, Defendant filed a Notice of Appeal of the Court’s remand order. (Dkt. No. 9.) On May 14, 2021, Defendant filed the current Notice of Removal. After taking Plaintiff's deposition and doing the work necessary to determine Plaintiff's actual citizenship, Defendant now alleges not that Plaintiff is a citizen of either California or South Carolina, but that Plaintiff is actually a citizen of North Carolina. “Once a notice of appeal is filed, the district court is divested of jurisdiction over the matters being appealed.” Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. Southwest Marine Inc., 242 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2001). The purpose of this rule is to “promote judicial economy and avoid the confusion that would ensue from having the same issue before two courts simultaneously.” Id. Thus, the Court orders Defendant to show cause, in writing, no later than May 25, 2021, whether this Court can exercise Jurisdiction over this action when there is a pending Notice of Appeal. Dismissal of the pending Notice of Appeal will be deemed a sufficient response to the Court’s Order to Show Cause. The failure to timely respond to the Court’s order may result in the imposition of sanctions. IT IS SO ORDERED.