Szantos

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff filed its Complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of San 21 Diego alleging a breach of contract of a credit cardholder agreement and damages of 22 $5,134.58. Defendant removed the case to federal court. Plaintiff now moves to remand 23 the case back to state court asserting federal jurisdiction is lacking. The motion to 24 remand is granted. 25

II. DISCUSSION

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. 27 Wullschleger, 145 S. Ct. 41, 47 (2025). Federal-question jurisdiction enables federal 28 courts to decide cases founded on federal law. Id. “A suit most typically falls within that statutory grant ‘when federal law creates the cause of action asserted.’” Id. (quoting Gunn v. Minton, 568 U.S. 251, 257 (2013)). However, the determination of jurisdiction is based “only on the allegations in the plaintiff’s ‘well-pleaded complaint’—not on any issue the defendant may raise.” Id. (citing Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal., 463 U.S. 1, 9–10 (1983)). “That longstanding rule makes the complaint—the plaintiff’s own claims and…