Golden v. Washington State Dept of Transportation et al

Filing 58

ORDER OF REMAND. The Clerk of Court is directed to remand this matter to King County Superior Court. Signed by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (SWT) (cc: Plaintiff via USPS)Per LCR 3(h), case will be remanded 14 days from date of this Order, on 2/22/2018.

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 6 7 8 9 10 DAVID GOLDEN, (alias G. JEREMY THUNDERCLOUD, JOHNY BIGFISH), an individual, 11 12 13 14 15 Case No. C17-1877RSL ORDER OF REMAND Plaintiff, v. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. The Court recently dismissed all claims against the federal defendants and Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. Neither the complaint nor the remainder of the record suggests that there is a federal defendant, a federal claim, or diversity of citizenship between or among the remaining parties. Although the existence of removal jurisdiction is determined at the time of removal (Abada v. Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., 300 F.3d 1112, 1117 (9th Cir. 2002)) and the subsequent narrowing of the parties or issues to exclude all federal interests does not strip the federal court of jurisdiction that was properly exerted at the outset (Harper v. AutoAlliance Int’l, Inc., 392 F.3d 195, 210-11 (6th Cir. 2004)), the Court finds that remand is appropriate in this case. A removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1442 gives rise to ancillary jurisdiction over the non-federal aspects of the case and “confers discretion on the district court to decline to exercise continued jurisdiction over [plaintiff’s] claim once [the federal defendant] dropped out of the case.” IMFC Prof’l Servs. of Fla., Inc. v. Latin Am. Home ORDER OF REMAND - 1 1 Health, Inc., 676 F.2d 152, 160 (5th Cir. 1982). In addition, “[t]he district court may decline to 2 exercise supplemental jurisdiction over a claim . . . if . . . the district court has dismissed all 3 claims over which it has original jurisdiction.” 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c). Given the early elimination 4 of the claims against the federal defendants and the apparent lack of federal claims or diversity 5 jurisdiction following dismissal of Sinclair Broadcast Group, the Court finds that remand of the 6 remaining state law issues is appropriate. 7 8 The Clerk of Court is directed to remand this matter to King County Superior Court. 9 10 Dated this 8th day of February, 2018. 11 12 13 A Robert S. Lasnik 14 United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDER OF REMAND - 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?