Dunn

Dunn brought suit in the California State Superior Court against two corporations, resident in another state, upon a cause of action wholly arising in the other state. The corporations were doing business in California and had designated an agent upon whom service of summons could be served. Upon motion of the cor *734 porations the cause was removed to the United States District Court upon the ground of diversity of citizenship. Thereupon the corporations-defeiidants appeared specially and presented a motion to set aside, vacate and quash the service, and the motion was granted. Dunn appeals.

The District Court acquired such jurisdiction, no more no less,, as the Superior Court had. Lambert Run Coal Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 1922, 258 U.S. 377, 382 , 42 S.Ct. 349, 351 , 66 L.Ed. 671 : “$ $ * qqjg jurisdiction of the federal court on removal is, in a limited sense, a derivative jurisdiction. If the state court lacks jurisdiction of the subject-matter or of the parties, the federal court acquires none, although it might in a like suit originally brought there have had jurisdiction. * * * ” Our inquiry therefore is: Did the State Superior Court have jurisdiction of the cause…