Miguel Angel Serrano Castillo v. Sheraton Operating Corporation

Filing 11

(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 10/11/2017. (vdr)

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

CV 17-7091 FMO (ASx)

Title

Miguel Angel Serrano Castillo v. Sheraton Operating Corporation

Present: The Honorable

Date

October 4, 2017

Fernando M. Olguin, United States District Judge

Vanessa Figueroa

None

None

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter / Recorder

Tape No.

Attorney Present for Plaintiff(s):

Attorney Present for Defendant(s):

None Present

None Present

Proceedings:

(In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Re: Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction in this case is asserted on the basis of the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”),
28 U.S.C. § 1332(d). (See Dkt. 2, Class Action Complaint for Damages at ¶¶ 1, 5). “CAFA
provides expanded original diversity jurisdiction for class actions meeting the amount in
controversy and minimal diversity and numerosity requirements set forth in 28 U.S.C. §
1332(d)(2).” United Steel, Paper & Forestry, Rubber, Mfg., Energy, Allied Indus. & Serv. Workers
Int’l Union, AFL-CIO, CLC v. Shell Oil Co., 602 F.3d 1087, 1090-91 (9th Cir. 2010). Under that
provision, “district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action in which the matter in
controversy exceeds the sum or value of $5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is a
class action in which . . . any member of a class of plaintiffs is a citizen of a State different from
any defendant[.]” 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2).
Having reviewed the Complaint, the court questions whether the claims of the individual
class members exceed $5,000,000 in the aggregate. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2); Dart Cherokee
Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, 135 S.Ct. 547, 554 (2014) (“Evidence establishing the
amount is required . . . when . . . the court questions, the . . . allegation.”). Plaintiff makes a
conclusory allegation that the class action’s amount in controversy exceeds $5 million, (see Dkt.
2, Complaint at ¶ 1), despite only claiming damages under one cause of action from September
26, 2016 to the present. (See Dkt. 2, Complaint at ¶¶ 18, 30-32).
Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that no later than October 11, 2017, plaintiff shall
show cause in writing why this action should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction for the
reasons noted above. Failure to respond to this order to show cause by the deadline set
forth above shall be deemed as consent to the dismissal of the action without prejudice for
lack of jurisdiction and/or failure to comply with a court order.
00
Initials of Preparer
CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

:

00

vdr
Page 1 of 1