Shaw

Shaw v. Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.

Good Law

128 F. Supp. 2d 1270·2001 WL 62903·2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3494

United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJanuary 23, 2001CV 00-12349 CMAJWXCalifornia1,885 words

Opinion

Moreno, J.

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND

Presently before the Court are Plaintiffs’ motion to remand to state court and Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint. Having considered the parties’ moving papers, materials submitted in support therewith, and oral argument, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ motion. The Court’s order renders Defendant’s motion moot.

I. Facts

Plaintiffs purport to represent a class of investors who used Defendant Charles Schwab’s web site to conduct purchases and sales of stocks, options, and other securities. In particular, Plaintiffs allege, inter alia, that:

Plaintiffs filed suit in California state court on October 18, 2000. Defendant promptly removed the action to this Court.

II. Legal Standard

A case must be remanded to state court if the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C. § 1447 (c). Where jurisdiction is not premised on diversity and none of the claims asserted “arise under” federal law, the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction and must remand the action to state court. See International Primate Protection League v. Administrators of Tulane Educational Fund, 500 U.S. 72, 87 , 111 S.Ct. 1700 , 114…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.