Anderson

ORDER DENYING REMAND

I. INTRODUCTION

The Court turns now to a motion by Plaintiffs to remand this case to State Court. ECF No. 15 (“Mot.”). The motion challenges the original notice of removal, 1 *1159 is fully briefed, 2 and is appropriate for resolution without oral argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-l(b). For the reasons set forth below, the motion is DENIED.

II. FACTS

This case includes both the facts alleged in the First Amended Complaint, ECF No. 9-1 (“FAC”), and an unusual procedural history that has followed. As to the former, certain individuals claim to have been deceived by certain advertising statements made by Defendant SeaWorld Parks and Entertainment, Inc. (“SeaWorld” or “Defendant”). FAC ¶¶ 1-12. SeaWorld is well known for and frequently advertises that it cares for sea creatures, including Oreas (otherwise known as “killer whales”). Id. at ¶¶ 4-5, 8-9, 55, 61, 73. Plaintiffs allege these claims are false, and that in reliance thereon they financially supported Sea-World through the purchase of tickets. FAC ¶¶ 11-12, 19-20, 56-57, 65-66, 77-78. However, Plaintiffs here do not seek any monetary damages on behalf of the class. Instead, they seek monetary…