Voice International Inc et al v. Tom Smith et al

Filing 15

MINUTE: (IN CHAMBERS) Order Remanding Action to State Court for all further proceedings IT IS SO ORDERED by Judge R. Gary Klausner (cc Copy of Minute Order, Docket Sheet and Letter of Remand to Los Angeles County Superior Court,Case number BC112958) (Case Terminated. Made JS-6) (Attachments: # 1 Letter of Remand - CV 103) (ir)

Download PDF
JS-6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Case No. CV 11-06838-RGK (JCx) Title VOICE INTERNATIONAL INC v. SMITH et al Present: The Honorable Date September 29, 2011 R. GARY KLAUSNER, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Sharon L. Williams Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants: Not Present Not Present Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) Order Remanding Action to State Court On June 9, 2011, Voice International, Inc. and David Grober (collectively “Plaintiffs”), filed suit against Tom Smith and Steve Waterford (collectively “Defendants”). In their Complaint, Plaintiffs allege state law claims involving violation of trade secretes, tortious interference, breach of contract, breach of confidential relationship, and conversion. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, district courts shall have original jurisdiction over any civil action in which the parties are citizens of different states and the action involves an amount in controversy that exceeds $75,000. After a plaintiff files a case in state court, the defendant attempting to remove the case to federal court bears the burden of proving the amount in controversy requirement has been met. Lowdermilk v. United States Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 479 F.3d 994, 998 (9th Cir. 2007). If the complaint does not allege the amount in controversy, the removing defendant must supply this jurisdictional fact in the Notice of Removal. Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566-567 (9th Cir. 1992). Defendants have failed to make this requisite showing. Plaintiffs have not alleged an amount in controversy in their Complaint. Defendants attempt to argue that the amount in controversy will necessarily exceed $75,000 because of the type of damages Plaintiffs have sustained. Such arguments are not sufficient to establish jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship. In light of the foregoing, the Court hereby remands the action to state court for all further proceedings. IT IS SO ORDERED. : Initials of Preparer CV-90 (10/08) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL slw Page 1 of 1

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?