Powell
Powell v. DEF Express, Inc.
Opinion
lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
The facts and procedural posture of the case are known to the parties, and we do not repeat them here.
*674 A. Powell v. DEF Express, Inc., IBP, Inc., and Royal Express, Inc.
Plaintiff-Appellants Brenda Powell and Steven Lewis Powell (Powell) appeal six district court orders. We affirm all six orders.
1. Denial of Motion to Remand
Powell argues that removal was improper because the presence of the Nevada Department of Transportation as a defendant in the lawsuit deprived the district court of subject matter jurisdiction under the Eleventh Amendment. That argument lacks merit. “The Eleventh Amendment ... does not automatically destroy original jurisdiction. Rather, the Eleventh Amendment grants the State a legal power to assert a sovereign immunity defense should it choose to do so.” Wisc. Dep’t of Corr. v. Schacht, 524 U.S. 381, 389 , 118 S.Ct. 2047 , 141 L.Ed.2d 364 (1998); accord ITSI T.V. Prods., Inc. v. Agric. Ass’ns, 3 F.3d 1289 , 1291 (9th Cir.1993).
Powell also argues that removal violated three procedural, or nonjurisdictional, rules: (i) the first-served rule for timeliness of removal; (ii) the rule of unanimity; and (iii) the forum defendant rule. See…