Goepner et al v. ABF Freight System, Inc.
Filing
48
MEMORANDUM DECISION and Order-denying 47 Motion to Reconsider Memorandum Decision and Order. Signed by Judge Clark Waddoups on 6/20/16. (jmr)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
JONATHAN GOEPNER et al.,
Plaintiffs,
MEMORANDUM DECISION
AND ORDER
vs.
Case No. 2:14-cv-743 CW
ABF FREIGHT SYSTEM, INC et al.,
Judge Clark Waddoups
Defendants.
This matter is before the court on a Rule 60(b) Motion to Reconsider filed by defendant
ABF Freight System, Inc. (“ABF Freight”). On June 16, 2016, the court issued a memorandum
decision and order that remanded this case to the Third Judicial District Court. The court
remanded the case based on ABF Freight’s failure to show complete diversity between plaintiffs
and defendants.
ABF Freight seeks to correct that error by contesting plaintiff Jonathan
Goepner’s place of residency at the time the Complaint was filed. It also seeks to provide
additional information about ABF Freight’s residency and Atlas Engineering, LLC’s residency. 1
1
ABF Freight provided a copy of Atlas Engineering, L.L.C.’s Articles of Organization to prove
its membership. The Articles are dated November 6, 2002. It lists the name of the manager,
who is listed as a Utah resident. The document, however, fails to establish the company’s
membership during the relevant time. While the manager may have been Atlas Engineering’s
only member on the date it was joined as a party on October 19, 2015, the Articles do not
establish that fact. Thus, the new information fails to correct the jurisdictional issues before the
court.
Per statute, “[a]n order remanding a case to the State court from which it was removed is
not reviewable on appeal or otherwise.”
28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (emphasis added).
Courts
interpreting this statute have concluded that once a case is remanded, with very limited
exceptions that are not applicable here, a district court lacks jurisdiction to reconsider or vacate
its remand order. See e.g., Chaara v. Intel Corp., No. Civ-05-278, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
95261, at *16-18 (D.N.M. Nov. 21, 2006) (citing cases from the First, Fourth, and Eleventh
Circuits and district court cases from the Tenth Circuit holding the same). Because this court
lacks jurisdiction to reconsider its remand order, ABF Freight’s Motion to Reconsider is
DENIED. (Dkt. No. 47).
DATED this 20th day of June, 2016.
BY THE COURT:
________________________________
Clark Waddoups
United States District Judge
2
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?