Fariba Kermanshahi v. Michael Jame Addineh

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaFebruary 24, 20202:20-cv-01466California1,816 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 JS-6 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FARIBA KERMANSHAHI, Case No. CV 20-01466 FMO (RAOx) 12 Petitioner,

13 v. ORDER REMANDING ACTION

AND DENYING REQUEST TO

14 MICHAEL JAME ADDINEH, PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS 15 Respondent. 16 17 I. 18

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

19 Petitioner Fariba Kermanshahi (“Petitioner”) filed a Petition for Dissolution of 20 Marriage in Los Angeles County Superior Court on August 16, 2017. Notice of 21 Removal (“Removal”) and Attached Petition (“Pet.”), Dkt. No. 1. Petitioner requests 22 dissolution of her marriage with Respondent Michael Jame Addineh (“Respondent”). 23 Pet. at 1. Respondent filed a Notice of Removal on February 13, 2020 invoking this 24 Court’s diversity jurisdiction. Removal at 1-9; see Dkt. No. 1-1 at 1. Respondent 25 also filed a request to proceed in forma pauperis. Dkt. No. 3. 26 /// 27 //// 28 1 II. 2 DISCUSSION 3 Federal courts are courts of …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.