WREN LA JV, LLC v. Seung Lee

JS-

4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WREN LA JV, LLC, CASE NUMBER:

10 2:21-cv-04314-MCS-MAA Plaintiff Vv. 13 Seung Lee, ORDER REMANDING CASE TO STATE COURT I5 Defendant(s). 16 The Court sua sponte REMANDS this action to the California Superior Court for the 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 must remain there until cause is shown for its transfer under some act of Congress.” |/Syngenta Crop Prot., Inc. v. Henson, 537 U.S. 28, 32 (2002) (quoting Great N. Ry. Co. v. 22 I] Alexander, 246 U.S. 276, 280 (1918)). Generally, where Congress has acted to create a right of llremoval, those statutes are strictly construed against removal jurisdiction. Id.; Nevada v. Bank of 24 Am. Corp., 672 F.3d 661, 667…