UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 15, 2013
TUONG HOANG, ET AL.
ALBERTSON'S SUPERVALU, ET AL.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable Dale S. Fischer, United States District Judge
Present: The Honorable DALE S. FISCHER, United States District Judge
Debra Plato Not Present Deputy Clerk Court Reporter Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants: Not Present Not Present
Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order REMANDING Case to State Court Defendants removed this case based on CAFA jurisdiction. The complaint unambiguously disavows that Plaintiffs seek to recover in excess of $5,000,000. Compl.
¶ 2. The notice of removal does not explicitly acknowledge this, but implicitly confirms that Defendants must demonstrate to a legal certainty that the amount in controversy exceeds $5,000,000. See Notice of Removal ¶ 30; see also Guglielmino v. McKee Foods , 506 F.3d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 2007). Defendants have not established to a legal certainty that the amount in controversy exceeds $5,000,000. Defendants' damages calculations are based on assumptions that have no apparent foundation in any actual evidence. For example, Defendants ask the Court to "assume" that "each class member was unpaid for just one and one-half hours of work per week between November 19, 2008, and December 7, 2012." Notice of Removal ¶ 24. But there is no basis for this assumption; the numbers are just pulled from the air. See also Notice of Removal ¶¶ 26,
The case is REMANDED to the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.