The Estate of Phillip Ortega Godinez v. Dee Perez

Case 5:22-cv-01708-JWH-MAR Document Filed 10/24/ Page 1 of Page ID #:

JS-

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THE ESTATE OF PHILIP ORTEGA

CASE NUMBER:

GODINEZ, et al. 5:22-cv-01708-JWH-MAR Plaintiff(s), v. DEE PEREZ, ELIBERTO GENERA,

ORDER REMANDING CASE TO

DSEREE PEREZ, ELIBERTO GENERA

STATE COURT

JR, DOES 1 TO

10 Defendant(s). 11 The Court sua sponte REMANDS this action to the California Superior Court for the 13 County of R i v e r s i d e 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 15 court must remain there until cause is shown for its transfer under some act of Congress.’” 16 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.;…