Christy Coney v. Julian Hernandez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT J S

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRISTY CONEY, CASE NUMBER:

10 ED CV 19-1507-SVW (SPx) Plaintiff v. 13 || JULIAN HERNANDEZ, et al.,

ORDER REMANDING CASE TO □

STATE COURT Defendant(s). 16 The Court sua sponte REMANDS this action to the California Superior Court for the 18 || County of San Bernardino for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as set forth below. “The right of removal is entirely a creature of statute and ‘a suit commenced in a state 20 || court must remain there until cause is shown for its transfer under some act of Congress.” 21 || Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. v. Henson, 537 U.S. 28, 32 (2002) (quoting Great Northern R. Co. ||v. Alexander, 246 U.S. 276, 280 (1918)). Where Congress has acted to create a right of removal, 23 || those statutes are strictly construed against removal jurisdiction. Id.; Nevada v. Bank of America 24 |! Corp., 672 F.3d 661, 667 (9th Cir.…