Hartmann v. Costco Wholesale Corporation

Filing 2

ORDER OF REMAND. Since it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded. Signed by Judge Larry Alan Burns on 10/2/2017. (Certified copy mailed to state court)(lrf)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA MARILYN HARTMANN, CASE NO. 17cv1908-LAB (NLS) Plaintiff, 11 12 13 ORDER OF REMAND vs. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORP., Defendant. 14 15 “If it is unclear what amount of damages the plaintiff has sought . . . then the 16 defendant bears the burden of actually proving the facts to support jurisdiction, including the 17 jurisdictional amount.” Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566–67 (9th Cir. 1992). As in Gaus, 18 Costco only offered a conclusory allegation that based on the causes of action, it was likely 19 the amount in controversy would exceed $75,000. This type of bare allegation “neither 20 overcomes the strong presumption against removal jurisdiction, nor satisfies [defendants’] 21 burden of setting forth, in the removal petition itself, the underlying facts supporting its 22 assertion that the amount in controversy” is met. Id. 567. Since “it appears that the district 23 court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded.” 28 U.S.C. § 1447. 24 25 26 27 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 2, 2017 HONORABLE LARRY ALAN BURNS United States District Judge 28 -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?