Marisabel Garcia v. Target Corporation, et al.

Opinion

3 MARISABEL GARCIA, 4 Plaintiff, Case No.: 2:25-cv-01809-GMN-NJK 5 vs. ORDER REMANDING CASE 6 TARGET CORPORATION, et al., 7 Defendants. 8

9 10 On September 29, 2025, Magistrate Judge Nancy Koppe ordered Defendant Target 11 Corporation to show cause why this case should not be remanded for lack of subject matter 12 jurisdiction. (See generally Order to Show Cause, ECF No. 6). Target filed a Response, which 13 states that Plaintiff’s damages are under $30,000 and therefore do not exceed the $75,000 14 amount in controversy requirement. (Resp. 3:1–2, ECF No. 8). 15 Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, possessing only those powers granted by 16 the Constitution and by statute. See United States v. Marks, 530 F.3d 799, 810 (9th Cir. 2008). 17 To remove a state law civil action to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction, a removing 18 defendant must show that the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000.00. 28 19 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Because Defendant admits that Plaintiff’s damages do not exceed $75,000, 20 this Court does not have jurisdiction over this case and must remand it. 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 1 Accordingly, 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is REMANDED to the Eighth Judicial 3 || District Court for Clark County. 4 DATED this _2] day of October, 2025. i,

Gloria M. na arro, District Judge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Page 2 of 2