United States District Court, C.D. California
ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO REMAND CASE TO
STATE COURT 
HONORABLE RONALD S.W. LEW SENIOR U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
before the Court is Plaintiff Peter Guinan's
(“Plaintiff”) Motion to Remand Case to State
Court . Having reviewed all papers submitted pertaining to
this Motion, the Court NOW FINDS AND RULES AS
FOLLOWS: the Court DENIES
is an individual residing in Orange County, California.
Compl. ¶ 1, ECF No. 1. Defendant International
Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 848 (“Local 848")
is and was a labor organization representing employees in the
State of California, County of Los Angeles. Id.
¶ 2. Defendant Shippers Transport Express, Inc.
(“STE”) is and was a California corporation doing
business in Los Angeles County, California. Id.
was formerly employed by Defendant STE as a driver and was a
member of Local 848. Mot. 3:20-21. On or about June 4, 2018,
Plaintiff was involved in a collision with another vehicle
while on duty. Id. at 3:22-24. Two days later, on
June 6, 2018, Plaintiff was suspended by STE pending further
investigation, and subsequently received his Written Notice
of termination on June 25, 2018. Id. at 3:23-4:3.
Plaintiff's Written Notice of termination stated that
Plaintiff was involved in three preventable accidents within
two years on January 1, 2016, September 20, 2017, and June 4,
2018. Compl. ¶¶ 16, 17, 18, 19.
claims that he filed a Grievance regarding the Written Notice
dated September 20, 2017, but that Local 848 never processed
it. Id. ¶ 19. Further, Plaintiff alleges that
he received a correspondence from the Local 848 Secretary
Treasurer regarding the Written Notice for the accident on
June 14, 2018, where the Secretary admitted that
Plaintiff's termination was wrong; however, Local 848 did
not challenge the Wrongful Discharge violations. Id.
19, 2018, Plaintiff filed a complaint with the National Labor
Relations Board against Local 848 and STE, which was
subsequently dismissed. Id. ¶¶ 23, 24. On
October 12, 2018, Plaintiff requested an extension of time to
file his appeal by November 11, 2018 and ultimately filed his
appeal on November 9, 2019. Id. ¶ 25. Plaintiff
received a letter dated February 7, 2019 from the National
Labor Relations Board deeming his appeal untimely.
Id. ¶ 26.
August 2, 2019, Plaintiff filed his complaint pursuant to
Labor Management Relations Act § 301
(“LMRA”) which governs contracts between labor
organizations and employers. Id. ¶¶ 10,
11. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant STE breached the
Collective Bargaining Agreement (“CBA”) between
it and Local 848 when it terminated Plaintiff without just
cause. Id. ¶ 32. Plaintiff further alleges that
Defendant Local 848 “arbitrarily, discrimnaotrily
[sic], and/or in bad faith, breached [its] duty of fair
representation . . . .” Id. ¶ 29.
Subsequently, on October 4, 2019, Defendant Local 848 removed
this Action to federal court on the basis of federal question
jurisdiction. See Notice of Removal, ECF No.
October 11, 2019, Defendant Local 848 filed a Motion to
Dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6)
for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted
. On October 15 2019, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion
to Remand the Action to State Court . On October 21, 2019,
the parties stipulated to have Plaintiff's Motion for
Remand heard prior to Defendant Local 848's Motion to
Dismiss [10, 11]. Defendant Local 848 filed its Opposition to
Plaintiff's Motion to Remand  on November 5, 2019,
and Plaintiff timely replied .
actions may be removed from state court if the federal court
has original jurisdiction. See Syngenta Crop Prot., Inc.
v. Henson, 537 U.S. 28, 33 (2002) (“Under the
plain terms of § 1441(a), in order properly to remove
[an] action pursuant to that provision, . . . original
subject-matter jurisdiction [must] lie in the federal
courts.”). Federal question jurisdiction exists in