CUENNTITREADL S DTIASTTERSIC DTI SOTFR CICATL ICFOOURRNTIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. CV-19-06195-RGK (JPRx) Date August 2, 2019 Title ABRAHAM KARABYAN v. VOLVO, et al

Present: The R. GARY KLAUSNER, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Honorable Sharon L. Williams Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants: Not Present Not Present Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) Order Remanding Action to State Court On July 18, 2019, Volvo Group of North America (“Defendant”) removed the current action filed by Abraham Karabyan, which alleges state claims for personal injury and products liability. Defendant removed the action to this Court alleging jurisdiction on the grounds of diversity of citizenship. Upon review of Defendant’s Notice of Removal, the Court hereby remands the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, district courts shall have original jurisdiction over any civil action in which the parties are citizens of different states and the action involved an amount in controversy that exceeds $75,000. After a plaintiff files a case in state court, the defendant attempting to remove the case to federal court bears the burden of proving the amount in controversy requirement has been met. Lowdermilk v. United States Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 479 F.3d 994, 998 (9th Cir. 2007). If the complaint does not allege that the amount in controversy has been met, the removing defendant must plausibly allege in its notice of removal that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional threshold. Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, 135 S. Ct. 547, 553-54(2014). If the plaintiff contests, or the court questions, the defendant’s allegation, the defendant must establish that the jurisdictional requirement has been met by a preponderance of the evidence. Guas v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566–67 (9th Cir. 1992). In his complaint, Plaintiff does not specify the amount of damages he seeks. Defendant’s removal merely states that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. This conclusory statement is insufficient to satisfy Defendant’s burden of showing by a preponderance of the evidence, that the amount in controversy meets the jurisdictional requirement.

CUENNTITREADL S DTIASTTERSIC DTI SOTFR CICATL ICFOOURRNTIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. CV-19-06195-RGK (JPRx) Date August 2, 2019 Title ABRAHAM KARABYAN v. VOLVO, et al In light of the foregoing, the action is hereby remanded to state court for all further proceedings.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

: Initials of Preparer