Wayne Whitley v. Lawson Products Inc et al

Filing 7

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge R. Gary Klausner:, ORDER by Judge R. Gary Klausner remanding case to Los Angeles Superior Court, Case number BC470384. Certified copy of case docket and remand order sent to state court. See order for details. Case Terminated. Made JS-6. (rne)

JS-6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

CV11-10271-RGK (MRWx)

Title

WAYNE WHITLEY v. LAWSON PRODUCTS INC.

Present: The
Honorable

Date

December 19, 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 September 30, 2011 Wayne Whitley (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Lawson Products,
Inc. (“Defendant”) alleging claims for 1) declaratory relief regarding status as employee, 2) declaratory
relief regarding restrictive covenants, 3) unfair competition under California Business & Professions
Code § 17200, 4) accounting, 5) failure to pay employee expenses, and 6) injunctive relief. Plaintiff
served the complaint on Defendant on November 15, 2011.
On December 13, 2011, Defendant removed the action to this Court alleging jurisdiction on the
grounds of diversity of citizenship. Upon review of Defendant’s Notice of Removal, the Court hereby
remands the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
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 that the amount in controversy has been met, the removing defendant must supply this
jurisdictional fact in the Notice of Removal by a preponderance of the evidence. Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980
F.2d 564, 566-567 (9th Cir. 1992).
Plaintiff has alleged in his claims for accounting and for reimbursement of expenses that the
amount in controversy is over $25,000. Defendant argues that each of these claims separately constitute
$25,000 in damage and that the total, including attorneys’ fees, must therefore be above $75,000.
Defendant fails to consider that Plaintiff’s claim for accounting and for reimbursement of expenses stem
from the same set of facts. Even with the inclusion of attorneys’ fees in the calculation, Defendant is no
closer to carrying its burden because there is no basis for estimating that the attorneys’ fees will
necessarily be above $75,000. Accordingly, Defendants has failed to satisfy its burden that the amount
in controversy meets the jurisdictional requirement.
CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

JS-6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.

CV11-10271-RGK (MRWx)

Date

Title

December 19, 2011

WAYNE WHITLEY v. LAWSON PRODUCTS INC.
In light of the foregoing, the action is hereby remanded to state court for all further proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

:
Initials of Preparer

CV-90 (10/08)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Page 2 of 2