Pollas v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided August 30, 2023·No. 1:22-cv-10207·Unknown

Opinion

SUONUITTEHDE SRTNA DTEISST DRIICSTTR OICFT N CEOWU YROT RK --------------------------------------------------------------x ROBERT POLLAS, : : Plaintiff, : 22-CV-10207 (PGG) (OTW) : -against- : ORDER : UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., : Defendant. : : : --------------------------------------------------------------x ONA T. WANG, United States Magistrate Judge: On June 16, 2023, the Court extended pro se Plaintiff’s time to file an amended complaint nunc pro tunc to August 25, 2023. (ECF 23). To date, Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or had any other communication with the Court. Consequently, the only defendant in this action is United Parcel Service, Inc. (“UPS”). Defendant UPS timely removed this action on the basis of diversity jurisdiction December 1, 2022. (ECF 1). Plaintiff filed a motion to remand on December 23, 2022. (ECF 8). Mr. Pollas is a citizen of New York. UPS is a corporation incorporated in Ohio with its principal place of business in Atlanta, Georgia. Accordingly, for the purposes of diversity jurisdiction, Plaintiff and Defendant are citizens of different states. Because complete diversity exists between the parties, and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, this Court has jurisdiction over this action. (See ECF 1; 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441, and 1446). Accordingly, this action was properly removed. Plaintiff’s motion to remand (ECF 8) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. As the Court noted in its June 16, 2023 Order (ECF 23), if Plaintiff amended his complaint to add his coworkers as defendants, this Court would no longer have diversity jurisdiction over the Co. v. Kroger, 437 U.S. 365, 373 (1978) (“[D]iversity jurisdiction does not exist unless each defendant is a citizen of a different State from each plaintiff”). Because Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, the Court cannot remand the action at this time. If Plaintiff wishes to file an amended complaint, he must do so on or before September 20, 2023. Defendant is directed to serve a copy of this Order on the pro se Plaintiff and file proof of service on the docket.

The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close ECF 8. SO ORDERED.

s/ Ona T. Wang Dated: August 30, 2023 Ona T. Wang New York, New York United States Magistrate Judge

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

Pollas v. United Parcel Service, Inc., (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Pollas v. United Parcel Service, Inc. (Pollas v. United Parcel Service, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. Kroger
437 U.S. 365 (Supreme Court, 1978)