Eileen Laub v. Kao USA Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
I.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Eileen Laub filed a Complaint against Defendants Kao USA, Inc. and Soraya Caudill on August 8, 2019 in Los Angeles County Superior Court. Complaint [Doc. # 1-1]. Defendants then filed a demurrer to the Complaint, which the Superior Court sustained on December 6, 2019. Wintersheimer Decl. at ¶ 3. Plaintiff thereafter filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) and a request for voluntary dismissal of Caudill, which the court granted on February 6, 2020. Id. Kao then filed an Answer to the FAC on February 7, 2020 in Superior Court, id., and removed the action to this Court on February 11, 2020. Notice of Removal [Doc. # 1].
Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Remand (“MTR”) on March 11, 2020. [Doc. # 8.] She argues that the Court should remand the case because Kao’s removal was procedurally improper and Kao has not established that there is at least $75,000 in controversy in this action. See id. Kao opposed the MTR, see Opp. [Doc. # 11], but Laub failed to file any Reply by her April 3, 2020 deadline to do so. For the following reasons, the Court DENIES the MTR.