Jane Roe KL 66 v. Doe 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 JANE ROE KL 66, Case No. 24-cv-07661-AMO

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

v. REMAND

DOE 1, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 15 Defendants.

12 Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to remand. ECF 15. The motion is fully briefed and suitable for disposition without hearing pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b). For the reasons set forth below, the motion is GRANTED. Remand is appropriate for two reasons. First, while Doe Defendants 1 and 2 removed this action to federal court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction, complete diversity is lacking. Plaintiff is a resident of California. Two of the Doe Defendants named in Plaintiff’s complaint are Utah corporations whose principal places of business are located in that state. The third Doe Defendant, according to the allegations in Plaintiff’s complaint, is a religious entity and subsidiary of Doe 1 of unknown form, operating pursuant to California law, with its principal…