Ho
Ho v. Ikon Office Solutions, Inc.
Opinion
Opinion
Brazil, J.
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REMAND AND CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
I. Introduction
Following the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in Tosco Corp. v. Communities for a Better Environment, 236 F.3d 495 (9th Cir.2001), the court raised sua sponte the question of Ikon’s corporate citizenship.
In order to determine Ikon’s “citizenship,” we must identify the state that is most appropriately considered Ikon’s “principal place of business.” If Ikon’s principal place of business is a state other than California the court must retain jurisdiction. If, however, we conclude that California is Ikon’s principal place of business the parties are not diverse and the court must remand.
II. Policy Underlying Diversity Statute
The primary purpose of the diversity statute is to avoid prejudice against “outsiders.” Corporations who have minimal contact with the public in a particular state are not likely to. be recognized as “locals.” The Congress that provided for diversity jurisdiction was concerned that a local jury sitting in state court might exhibit bias in favor of a “local” party who was suing an out-of-state party. Because federal courts draw from a wider jury pool, removal to federal court, so the theory…