Xiomara Vega v. Target Corporation

Filing 16

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER Re Failure to Oppose Plaintiff Motion for Leave to file Amended and to Remand Action to State court 14 by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell: The Court GRANTS Plaintiff Motion for Leave to Amend pursuant to Rule 7-12 and GRANTS Plaintiffs Motion to Remand. The hearing currently scheduled for Monday, December 12, 2016, is hereby VACATED. (MD JS-6. Case Terminated.) (jp)

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

CV 16-02157-BRO (SPx)

Title

XIOMARA VEGA V. TARGET CORPORATION

Date

December 9, 2016

Present: The Honorable

BEVERLY REID O’CONNELL, United States District Judge

Renee A. Fisher

Not Present

N/A

Deputy Clerk

Court Reporter

Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Petitioners:

Attorneys Present for Respondents:

Not Present

Not Present

Proceedings:

(IN CHAMBERS)

ORDER RE FAILURE TO OPPOSE
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT AND
TO REMAND ACTION TO STATE COURT [14]
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Xiomara Vega’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for
Leave to File an Amended Complaint and to Remand the Action to State Court. (Dkt.
No. 14.) Plaintiff filed her Motion on November 8, 2016, noticing a hearing date of
December 12, 2016. (Id.) Under this Court’s Local Rules, a party must oppose a motion
(or file a notice of non-opposition) at least twenty-one (21) days prior to the scheduled
hearing date. See C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-9.1 Accordingly, Defendant Target Corporation’s
(“Defendant”) Opposition was due no later than November 21, 2016. See id. Defendant
filed to file a timely Opposition. Accordingly, on November 28, 2016, the Court issued
an Order to Show Cause as to why the Court should not grant Plaintiff’s Motion, and
requiring Defendant to file an Opposition, if any, by December 1, 2016. (Dkt. No. 15.)
As of today’s date, Defendant has not responded to Plaintiff’s Motion. Pursuant to Local
Rule 7-12, the failure to file an opposition “may be deemed consent to the granting . . . of
the motion.” See C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-12. Therefore, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion
for Leave to File an Amended Complaint pursuant to Local Rule 7-12. See id.
Defendant initially removed this action under this Court’s diversity jurisdiction
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. (See Dkt. No. 1.) Under § 1332, the Court has federal
subject matter jurisdiction so long as all plaintiffs are diverse from all defendants and the
amount in controversy is, at minimum, $75,000. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Along with

1

A copy of this Court’s Local Civil Rules is available at the United States District Court, Central
District of California’s website: https://www.cacd.uscourts.gov/court-procedures/local-rules.
CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Page 1 of 2

LINK:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No.

CV 16-02157-BRO (SPx)

Title

XIOMARA VEGA V. TARGET CORPORATION

Date

December 9, 2016

the instant Motion, Plaintiff filed a Proposed First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). (See
Dkt. No. 14-1 (hereinafter, “FAC”).) The proposed FAC indicates that Plaintiff is a
California resident and Defendant is a Minnesota corporation with its principal place of
business also in Minnesota. (See FAC ¶¶ 1–2.) Plaintiff’s FAC includes an additional
defendant, however, that was not included in Plaintiff’s Original Complaint: Amber
Vodola, who is also a California resident. (FAC ¶ 3; see also Dkt. No. 1, Ex. A.)
Therefore, as the Court grants Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend, this Court now
lacks jurisdiction under § 1332, as all Defendants in this action are no longer diverse
from Plaintiff. As such, the action must be remanded to the Superior Court of California,
San Bernardino County.

Therefore, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend pursuant to
Rule 7-12 and GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand. The hearing currently scheduled
for Monday, December 12, 2016, is hereby VACATED.
:

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Initials of Preparer

CV-90 (06/04)

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

rf

Page 2 of 2