Tom Richardson v. Costco Wholesale Corporation, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TOM RICHARDSON, Case No. 25-cv-08640-RFL

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

v. REMAND

COSTCO WHOLESALE Re: Dkt. No. 7 CORPORATION, et al., Defendants.

Richardson, a California resident, alleges that he suffered an injury at a Costco location in South San Francisco. He commenced this action in state court against three defendants to recover: (1) Costco, a Washington State corporation; (2) Eddie Bello, a Costco employee who resides in California; and (3) Beth Monroe, another Costco employee who resides in California. Defendants removed the action to this Court based on diversity jurisdiction. Richardson now moves to remand the case back to state court primarily on the basis that Bello and Monroe’s presence extinguishes diversity jurisdiction. (See Dkt. No. 7 (the “Motion”).) For the reasons set forth below, the Motion is GRANTED.1 Costco does not dispute that Bello and Monroe are California residents. Instead, it argues that the jurisdictional analysis should exclude their California citizenship because they were fraudulently joined as defendants. See…