Rachel Malloy v. Nissan North America, Inc., et al
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
I. INTRODUCTION
Before the Court is Plaintiff Rachel Malloy’s Motion to Remand (“Motion”). [Dkt. 8]. As discussed below, the Court finds that the requirements for subject matter jurisdiction are not met. The motion is granted.
II. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff leased a 2023 Nissan Rogue (“Vehicle”) on March 26, 2023. Complaint ¶ 5 [Dkt. 1-1]. Plaintiff alleges the lease of the Vehicle was accompanied by express and implied warranties. Id. ¶¶ 7, 15. Plaintiff also contends that, during the warranty period, she presented the Vehicle to Defendants for repairs of nonconformities, including but not limited to recalls PC966 and PD108, defects of the infotainment system, seats shifting when braking, transmission leaking, lopsided driver side seat, and hub assembly causing noise. Id. ¶ 10. Plaintiff asserts that Defendant failed to conform the Vehicle to the applicable warranties. Id. ¶¶ 12, 29.
On May 2, 2025, Plaintiff filed this action in the Los Angeles Superior Court, asserting claims pursuant to the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. Id. ¶¶ 14–34. Defendant Nissan North America, Inc. removed the action on August 28, 2025. Notice of Removal [Dkt. 1].