UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No.: CV 19-01986 AB (SHKx) Date: November 21, 2019

Title: Laura Rodriguez v. Schenker, Inc. et al.

Present: The Honorable ANDRE BIROTTE JR., United States District Judge Carla Badirian N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorney(s) Present for Plaintiff(s): Attorney(s) Present for Defendant(s): None Appearing None Appearing

Proceedings: [In Chambers] ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE

SHOULD NOT BE REMANDED FOR LACK OF SUBJECT

MATTER JURISDICTION

Defendants removed this action on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. “The “strong presumption’ against removal jurisdiction means that the defendant always has the burden of establishing that removal is proper.” Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992). “Because of the Congressional purpose to restrict the jurisdiction of the federal courts on removal,” statutes conferring jurisdiction are “strictly construed and federal jurisdiction must be rejected if there is any doubt as to the right of removal in the first instance.” Duncan v. Stuetzle, 76 F.3d 1480, 1485 (9th Cir. 1996) (citations and quotations omitted). Defendants’ Notice of Removal (“NOR”) is inadequate to establish Plaintiff's citizenship because it alleges only that she is and was a resident of the state of California. See NOR 2:26-28. “But the diversity jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1332, speaks of citizenship, not of residency. |] The natural person’s state citizenship is [] determined by her state of domicile, not her state of residence. A person’s domicile is her permanent home, where she resides with the intention to

CV-90 (12/02) CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk CB

remain or to which she intends to return.” Kanter v. Warner-Lambert Co., 265 F.3d 853, 857 (9th Cir. 2001). Defendant’s “failure to specify Plaintiffs’ state citizenship [is] fatal” to Defendant’s assertion of diversity jurisdiction. Id. at 858.

Defendant may attempt to cure this defect by filing an Amended Notice of Removal no later than 3:00 p.m., on November 26, 2019. If Defendant does not do so by the deadline, the case may be remanded without further notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.