Caesar Ruiz v. TAF, LLC

Filing 25

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS): ORDER DENYING Plaintiff's Motion to Remand (Dkt. No.15) by Judge Dale S. Fischer: See Memorandum for Specifics. (bp)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MEMORANDUM

Case No.
Title

Date

CV 15-2853 DSF (SSx)

5/27/15

Caesar Ruiz v. Towne Air Freight, Inc.

Present: The
Honorable

DALE S. FISCHER, United States District Judge

Debra Plato
Deputy Clerk

Not Present
Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs:

Attorneys Present for Defendants:

Not Present

Not Present

Proceedings:

(In Chambers) Order DENYING Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand
(Dkt. No. 15)

Defendant TAF, LLC (f/k/a Towne Air Freight, Inc.) removed this case based on
CAFA jurisdiction. Plaintiff moves to remand. The Court deems this matter appropriate
for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; Local Rule 7-15. The
hearing set for June 1, 2015 is removed from the Court’s calendar.
Defendant has established that it is a citizen of Tennessee. Plaintiff’s contention
that testimony from an officer of the Defendant LLC is insufficient to prove Defendant’s
organizational structure is incorrect. Plaintiff also fails to provide any evidence that
would contradict the testimony provided by Defendant.
Defendant has also established that the amount in controversy exceeds $5,000,000.
Most of Defendant’s calculations assume a violation rate of once per pay period. This is
reasonable, especially given the vague and broad allegations in the complaint. The only
portion of Defendant’s calculation that the Court finds suspect is Defendant’s assumption
that each class member missed a meal period and a break period every single day. But
even if meal and rest breaks were missed, on average, only every fourth day – a
conservative assumption given the allegations – the total amount in controversy for the
entire case would still exceed $5,000,000, especially if the cost of injunctive relief were
considered.
The motion to remand is DENIED.
CV-90 (12/02)

MEMORANDUM

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
MEMORANDUM

IT IS SO ORDERED.

CV-90 (12/02)

MEMORANDUM

Page 2 of 2