Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Catalina Ricaldai v. Us Investigations Services

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


December 14, 2010

CATALINA RICALDAI,
ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFF,
v.
US INVESTIGATIONS SERVICES, LLC,
A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABLITY COMPANY, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dean D. Pregerson United StatesDistrict Judge

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO REMAND CASE TO LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT [Motion filed on November 3, 2010]

Presently before the court is Plaintiff Catalina Ricaldai's Motion to Remand Case to Los Angeles Superior Court. Plaintiff argues that removal to this court was improper because the matter does not meet the amount-in-controversy threshold for original subject matter jurisdiction. (Pl.'s Motion 2:9-11.)

The "strong presumption" against removal jurisdiction means that the defendant always has the burden of establishing that removal is proper. Gaus v. Miles, 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992). Here, Defendant U.S. Investigations Services, LLC has set forth a detailed calculation of the jurisdictional amount.

According to Defendant's calculations "even using the lowest possible number of California Investigators who allegedly missed meal periods, and assuming that only half of separated California Investigators could recover waiting time penalties, the amount in controversy still exceeds $8 million," well above the minimum for purposes of removal pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act ("CAFA"), 29 U.S.C. § 1332(d).

Having considered the papers submitted by the parties, and in particular the calculations and numbers provided by Defendants, the court finds that Defendants have met their burden of providing facts in support of removal. Plaintiff's Motion to Remand Case to Los Angeles Superior Court is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20101214

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.