Kendall

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANN MARIE KENDALL, Case No. 22-cv-05324-VC

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

v. REMAND

VERIZON DATA SERVICES LLC, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 10 Defendants.

The motion to remand is denied because the amount in controversy is more than $75,000. While this is a putative class action, neither side argues that CAFA’s jurisdictional requirements are satisfied here. The question is therefore whether there is diversity jurisdiction over Kendall’s individual claims. The complaint does not give specific dollar amounts or numbers of hours, so Verizon may make “reasonable assumptions.” See Ibarra v. Manheim Investments, Inc., 775 F.3d 1193, 1198 (9th Cir. 2015). Kendall is right that Verizon’s estimate of three hours of unpaid overtime per week is too high; one hour per week is a more reasonable estimate. (Kendall may make this argument without providing her own evidence. Harris v. KM Industrial, Inc., 980 F.3d 694, 700 (9th Cir. 2020).) More importantly, Verizon’s estimate assumes that Kendall was not paid anything for her overtime work. Notice of Removal 6. But the complaint only claims…