Donald A. Nordine v. Shelby Woodruff

Case 5:22-cv-00700-JVS-KS Document14, Filed 04/28/ Pagelof3 Page ID #:

JS-

2 :

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Donald A. Nordine et al

ED CV 22-0700-JVS-KS

° Plaintiff(s), v. Shelby Woodruff et al., ORDER REMANDING CASE TO STATE COURT Defendant(s). commana 11 The Court sua sponte REMANDS this action to the California Superior Court for the 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 [court must remain there until cause is shown for its transfer under some act of Congress.” Syngenta Crop Prot., Inc. v. Henson, 537 U.S. 28, 32 (2002) (quoting Great N. Ry. Co. v. 17 }{ Alexander, 246 U.S. 276, 280 (1918)). Generally, where Congress has acted to create a right of 18 removal, those statutes are strictly construed against removal jurisdiction. Id.; Nevada v. Bank of 19 1! Am. Corp., 672 F.3d 661, 667 (9th Cir. 2012); Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir.…