Philip Lawrence v. Patrizio Moi

I. BACKGROUND

Lawrence alleges Moi fraudulently induced him to sign an agreement that purported to transfer the ownership of a business and its intellectual property from Lawrence to Moi. Lawrence asserts ten claims: (1) intentional misrepresentation; (2) false promise; (3) fraudulent inducement; (4) violation of the California Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200; (5) conversion; (6) trademark infringement; (7) unjust enrichment; (8) intentional interference with contractual relations; (9) rescission; and (10) declaratory relief. (See generally Compl., ECF No. 1-1.)

Lawrence initiated the action in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, No. 21STCV27084. Moi removed the action to this Court on the basis that the Court has federal-question jurisdiction over the trademark claim. (Notice of Removal ¶ 4, ECF No. 1.) Weeks later, Moi initiated the parallel action in this Court. Compl., Moi v. Lawrence, No. 2:21-cv-07022-MCS-MAR, ECF No. 1.

II. LEGAL STANDARD

“Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction” and “possess only that power authorized by Constitution and statute.” Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). A defendant may…