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.

Boahua Zheng v. Rex Spirits

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


April 29, 2013

BOAHUA ZHENG
v.
REX SPIRITS, INC. ET AL.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Fernando M. Olguin, United States District Judge

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Present: The Honorable Fernando M. Olguin, United States District Judge

Vanessa Figueroa None

Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No.

Attorney Present for Plaintiff(s): Attorney Present for Defendant(s):

None Present None Present

Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Re: Remand

On April 4, 2013, this action was removed to this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441. However, the jurisdictional allegations appear to be defective. Specifically, defendants fail to offer adequate facts to support the assertion that the principal place of business stated in the complaint is defendant's principal place of business. For diversity purposes, the principal place of business is "the place where a corporation's officers direct, control, and coordinate the corporation's activities." Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 130 S.Ct. 1181, 1192 (2010); see Harris v. Rand, 682 F.3d 846, 851 (9th Cir. 2012) (if allegations of a corporation's principal place of business are implausible or the court has doubts about whether diversity exists, it may request additional allegations of the principal place of business). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. No later than May 9, 2013, defendants shall show cause in writing why this action should not be remanded for the reasons noted above. This deadline shall not extend the time for responding to any motion for remand filed by plaintiff. Plaintiff may submit a response in the same time period. If plaintiff wish to move for remand based on this procedural defect, plaintiff must file a regularly noticed motion for remand no later than May 6, 2013. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) ("A motion to remand the case on the basis of any defect other than lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be made within 30 days after the filing of the notice of removal").

2. A copy of all papers filed with the court shall be delivered to the drop box outside chambers at Suite 520, Spring Street Courthouse, 312 North Spring Street, no later than 12:00 noon the following business day. All chambers copies shall comply fully with the document formatting requirements of Local Rule 11-3, including the "backing" requirements of Local Rule 11-3.5. Counsel may be subject to sanctions for failure to deliver a mandatory chambers copy in full compliance with this Order and Local Rule 11-3.

20130429

© 1992-2013 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.