Jones and Jones Management Group Inc. v. Franklin Nicholas

JS-

1 2 3 4 5

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

> || JONES & JONES MANAGEMENT GAseNUERE. 10 || GROUP INC A CALIFORNIA SOR ORSTION: CV 19-7641 CAS (FEMx) Plaintiff v. 13 || FRANKLIN NICHOLAS,

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 Los Angeles 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 Prot., Inc. v. Henson, 537 U.S. 28, 32 (2002) (quoting Great N. Ry. Co. v. 22 || Alexander, 246 U.S. 276, 280 (1918)). Generally, where Congress has acted to create a right of 23 || removal, those statutes are strictly construed against removal jurisdiction. Id.; Nevada v. Bank of 24 || Am. Corp., 672 F.3d 661, 667 (9th Cir. 2012); Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992). …