Marte-De-Lara v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

• Court: District Court, D. Nevada
• Decided: September 18, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-01525
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA BONIFACIA MILAGROS MARTE-DE- Case No.: 2:25-cv-01525-APG-NJK LARA, 4 Order Remanding Case Plaintiff 5 [ECF No. 9] v. 6 STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE 7|| INSURANCE COMPANY, 8 Defendant 9 On August 19, 2025, I ordered defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company to show cause why this case should not be remanded for lack of subject matter 11]}|jurisdiction. ECF No. 6. I advised State Farm that failure to respond by September 9, 2025 would result in remand. /d. at 3. Additionally, the plaintiff moved to remand, which State Farm did not oppose. ECF No. 9. As the party seeking to invoke this court’s jurisdiction, State Farm 141 bears the burden of showing jurisdiction exists. See Naffe v. Frey, 789 F.3d 1030, 1040 (9th Cir. 15}}2015). It has not done so, so I deny the plaintiff's motion to remand as moot and remand this case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. 17 I THEREFORE ORDER that the plaintiff's motion to remand (ECF No. 9) is DENIED as moot. 19 I FURTHER ORDER that this case is remanded to the state court from which it was 20]|removed for all further proceedings. The clerk of court is instructed to close this case. 21 DATED this 18th day of September, 2025. 22 Ye A 23 ANDREW P. GORDON CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE