Markowitz v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

S.D. California

Markowitz v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

District Court, S.D. California·Decided November 27, 2019·No. 3:19-cv-00655·Unknown

Opinion

CANDICE MARKOWITZ, Case No.: 19cv655-L-LL

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' v. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND NOTICE OF REMOVAL INC. ET AL., Defendants.

Defendants Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., CooperSurgical, Inc. and The Cooper Companies, Inc. removed this personal injury action from State court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1332 and 1441. The action was remanded for failure to sufficiently allege diversity jurisdiction based on fraudulent joinder. (See doc. no. 6.) Pending before the Court is Defendants' motion for leave to amend notice of removal to allege additional facts in support of fraudulent joinder. (Doc. no. 7.) Plaintiff filed an opposition and Defendants replied. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1653, Defendants' motion is granted. See Willingham v. Morgan, 395 U.S. 402, 407 n.3 (1969); Cohn v. Petsmart, 281 F.3d 837, 840 n.1 (9th Cir. 2002); Rockwell Int'l Credit Corp. v. U.S. Aircraft Ins. Group, 823 F.2d 302, 304 (9th Cir. 1987). Seedman v. U.S. Dist. Ct. (Empire of Am.), 837 F.2d 413, 414 (9th Cir. 1988), upon which Plaintiff relies, 1s distinguishable, because it addresses successive notices of removal rather than amendment under 28 U.S.C. §1653 to amend defective allegations of jurisdiction. Accordingly, no later than December 6, 2019, Defendants shall file their amended notice of removal, if any. The Court expresses no opinion regarding the sufficiency of the proposed amended notice of removal filed with Defendants’ motion. (Doc. no. 7 at Dated: November 27, 2019 pee ep? H . James Lorenz, 1D United States District Judge

Page numbers are assigned by the Electronic Case Filing System.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CANDICE MARKOWITZ, Case No.: 19cv655-L-LL

Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' v. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND NOTICE OF REMOVAL INC. ET AL., Defendants.

Defendants Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., CooperSurgical, Inc. and The Cooper Companies, Inc. removed this personal injury action from State court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1332 and 1441. The action was remanded for failure to sufficiently allege diversity jurisdiction based on fraudulent joinder. (See doc. no. 6.) Pending before the Court is Defendants' motion for leave to amend notice of removal to allege additional facts in support of fraudulent joinder. (Doc. no. 7.) Plaintiff filed an opposition and Defendants replied. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1653, Defendants' motion is granted. See Willingham v. Morgan, 395 U.S. 402, 407 n.3 (1969); Cohn v. Petsmart, 281 F.3d 837, 840 n.1 (9th Cir. 2002); Rockwell Int'l Credit Corp. v. U.S. Aircraft Ins. Group, 823 F.2d 302, 304 (9th Cir. 1987). Seedman v. U.S. Dist. Ct. (Empire of Am.), 837 F.2d 413, 414 (9th Cir. 1988), upon which Plaintiff relies, 1s distinguishable, because it addresses successive notices of removal rather than amendment under 28 U.S.C. §1653 to amend defective allegations of jurisdiction. Accordingly, no later than December 6, 2019, Defendants shall file their amended notice of removal, if any. The Court expresses no opinion regarding the sufficiency of the proposed amended notice of removal filed with Defendants’ motion. (Doc. no. 7 at Dated: November 27, 2019 pee ep? H . James Lorenz, 1D United States District Judge

Page numbers are assigned by the Electronic Case Filing System.

Markowitz v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., (S.D. Cal. 2019).

Pincite

Markowitz v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. (Markowitz v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related