Case 2:22-cv-01706-RGK-MAA Document 45 Filed 07/19/22 Pagelof2 Page ID #:565

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. 2:22-cv-01706-RGK-MAA Date July 19, 2022 Title Wala Ali Khalaf v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC

JS6

Present: The Honorable R. GARY KLAUSNER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Joseph Remigio Not Reported N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No. Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendant: Not Present Not Present Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) Order Dismissing Action for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction On March 15, 2022, Wala Ali Khalaf (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (“Defendant”), alleging violations of the Song-Beverly Warranty Act. (See Compl.) Plaintiff seeks damages, civil penalties, and attorneys’ fees and costs. (FAC, ECF No. 19.) Plaintiff invokes diversity jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1332). (FAC 9 17, ECF No. 1.) Upon review of the complaint, the Court hereby DISMISSES the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3) (“If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court must dismiss the action.”’). Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, district courts 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. Here, Plaintiff fails to plausibly allege that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional threshold. Plaintiff alleges that the total sales price for the vehicle at issue is $40,823.84 (FAC 18.) Plaintiff also seeks civil penalties, and attorneys’ fees and costs. These penalties and costs, however, are speculative. As to civil penalties, while authorized under the Song-Beverly Act, Plaintiff has not alleged sufficient facts supporting such an award. As to attorneys’ fees, district courts within the Ninth Circuit are split with respect to including prospective attorneys’ fees in the amount in controversy, and some courts have declined to do so. See, e.g., MIC Philberts Invs. v. Am. Cas. Co of Reading, Pa., 2012 WL 2118239, at *5 (E.D. Cal. June 11, 2012). In those cases, the courts have found that attorneys’ fees are in the control of the client and counsel, and may be avoided or accrue over years depending on legal strategy. See Grieffv. Brigandi Coin Co., 2014 WL 2608209, at *3 (W.D. Wash. June 11, 2014). The Court finds those holdings well-reasoned and finds that prospective attorneys’ fees are too speculative to include in the amount in controversy.

CV-90 (06/04) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 1 of 2

Case 2:22-cv-01706-RGK-MAA Document 45 Filed 07/19/22 Page2of2 Page ID #:566

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. 2:22-cv-01706-RGK-MAA Date July 19, 2022 Title Wala Ali Khalaf v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC

JS6

Therefore, the Court finds that Plaintiff has not plausibly alleged that the amount in controversy meets the jurisdictional requirement. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, without prejudice to file the action in state court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Initials of Preparer jre/k

CV-90 (06/04) CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL Page 2 of 2