Saul Romero v. Wayfair, LLC

facts sufficient to sustain a claim of harassment against the individual defendants.” 1 The Court finds this matter suitable for decision without oral argument and vacates the June 6, 2025 motion hearing. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; L.R. 7-15. Dkt. No. 12, at 5–10. The Court agrees that the allegations, as currently pleaded, are insufficient to state a claim. But this alone is insufficient to overcome the general presumption against removal jurisdiction and the specific presumption against finding fraudulent joinder. Grancare, LLC v. Thrower, 889 F.3d 543, 548 (9th Cir. 2019). Rather, given these presumptions, a district court must remand the case if there is “a possibility that a state court would find that the complaint states a cause of action” against the nondiverse defendant(s). Id. at 548 (cleaned up). This “‘possibility’ standard”—which requires the removing party to show that the allegations against the nondiverse defendant are “wholly insubstantial and frivolous”—is not equivalent to the motion-to-dismiss standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). Id. at 549–50 (cleaned up). It is not enough that the complaint fails to state a claim; the court must also…