Debra Biane, et al. v. Universal City Studios, LLC, et al.

Biane v. Universal City Studios · United States District Court for the Central District of California · May 16, 2025 · No. 2:25-cv-01271-AB-PD

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California granted Plaintiffs’ motion to remand the action to Los Angeles County Superior Court. The court held that Defendant’s removal was untimely because discovery responses and medical records made the amount in controversy facially apparent more than 30 days before removal, but denied Plaintiffs’ request for attorneys’ fees and costs.

Holdings

  1. Universal's removal was untimely because Plaintiffs' October 17, 2024 discovery responses and medical records made it facially apparent that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, triggering the thirty-day removal period; Universal's February 13, 2025 removal occurred well after that deadline.
  2. Plaintiffs were not entitled to attorneys' fees and costs because they did not show that Universal lacked an objectively reasonable basis for removal.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Universal's notice of removal was timely under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b).
  2. Whether Plaintiffs were entitled to attorneys' fees and costs incurred in obtaining remand under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c).

Disposition

remanded

Cases Cited (11)

  • Caterpillar Inc. v. Lewis, 519 U.S. 61, 67-68 (1996)(followed)
  • Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992)(followed)
  • Carvalho v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, 629 F.3d 876, 885 (9th Cir. 2010)(followed)
  • Kuxhausen v. BMW Fin. Servs. NA LLC, 707 F.3d 1136, 1139-1140 (9th Cir. 2013)(followed)
  • Harris v. Bankers Life & Cas. Co., 425 F.3d 689, 693, 695 (9th Cir. 2005)(followed)
  • Durham v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 445 F.3d 1247, 1250-1251 (9th Cir. 2006)(followed)
  • Hammarlund v. C.R. Bard, Inc., 2015 WL 5826780, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 2, 2015)(followed)
  • Campbell v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., No. CIVF051499FVSDLB, 2006 WL 707291, at *3 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 17, 2006)(followed)
  • Fjelstad v. Vitamin Shoppe Indus. LLC, No. 220CV07323ODWAFMX, 2021 WL 364638, at *4 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 3, 2021)(followed)
  • Gebbia v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 233 F.3d 880, 883 (5th Cir. 2000)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 11.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…