Hung Huynh v. Gerard Richard Williams III

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California grants Plaintiff Hung Huynh’s motion to remand, vacates the scheduled hearing, and remands the action to Orange County Superior Court. The court holds that Defendant’s removal based on diversity jurisdiction was untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(1) and also improper under the forum defendant rule because Defendant failed to establish Missouri rather than California citizenship. The court denies Plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees and costs because the removal was not objectively unreasonable.

Holdings

1. Removal was untimely because diversity jurisdiction was apparent from the complaint served on November 27, 2024, triggering the thirty-day removal period, and the purported dismissal request did not toll or restart that period because it was never filed and the action was never dismissed.
2. Removal was independently improper under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(2) because Defendant was domiciled in California, the state in which the action was brought.
3. Attorney's fees and costs were denied because, although Defendant's removal arguments lacked merit, the court could not conclude that removal was objectively unreasonable or clearly foreclosed by relevant precedent.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Defendant's August 7, 2025 removal was timely under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(1).
2. Whether removal was barred by the forum defendant rule because Defendant was domiciled in California, the forum state.
3. Whether Plaintiff was entitled to attorney's fees and costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c).

Disposition

remanded