Christopher Roberson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

facts whatsoever to state a claim for harassment or wrongful termination by either Snyder or Meza—he pleads only legal conclusions, which are insufficient, and need not be considered true by this Court.” Id. This argument fails to address the correct standard. As this Court has previously explained: “In determining whether there is complete diversity, district courts may disregard the citizenship of a non-diverse defendant who has been fraudulently joined.” Grancare, LLC v. Thrower ex rel. Mills, 889 F.3d 543, 548 (9th Cir. 2018). Fraudulent joinder can be established by showing either fraudulent pleading of jurisdictional facts or the plaintiff's inability to establish a cause of action against the non-diverse party in state court. Id. The latter, on which Walmart relies, requires a showing that the non-diverse defendant “cannot be liable on any theory.” Id. (quoting Ritchey v.

2 The parties do not dispute that the $75,000 threshold is met. Upjohn Drug Co., 139 F.3d 1313, 1318 (9th Cir. 1998)). “[T]he test for fraudulent joinder and for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) are not equivalent.” Id. at 549. A court must consider “whether a deficiency in the…