Uribe

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

MEMORANDUM *

Plaintiff Jose Uribe appeals the denial of his motion to remand and the grant of defendant Autozone’s motions for judgment on the pleadings and summary judgment. Uribe filed a complaint against his *897 former employer alleging, inter alia, state law claims of invasion of privacy and wrongful termination in violation of public policy after he was discharged for dating a subordinate. This action was originally filed in Superior Court for the County of Los Angeles, and was removed on the basis of diversity jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm in part and reverse in part.

We review de novo an order denying a motion to remand for lack of jurisdiction. United Computer Sys., Inc. v. AT & T Corp., 298 F.3d 756 , 760 (9th Cir.2002). In diversity cases where the amount in controversy is in dispute, a reviewing court may look beyond allegations in the complaint and consider other evidence relevant to the amount in controversy at the time of removal. Valdez v. Allstate Ins. Co., 372 F.3d 1115, 1117 (9th Cir.2004). The district court properly relied upon a pre-removal…