Daniel Brubaker v. Amazon.com Services LLC

Brubaker · United States District Court for the District of Maine · February 10, 2026 · No. 2:25-cv-00440-LEW

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Maine grants Plaintiff Daniel Brubaker’s motion to remand his Maine statutory personnel-file claim against Amazon.com Services LLC. The court concludes that Amazon failed to establish a reasonable probability that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 and finds that removal lacked an objectively reasonable basis, permitting Brubaker to seek remand-related attorney’s fees.

Court
United States District Court for the District of Maine
Writing for the Court
Lance E. Walker
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the District of Maine
Decision date
February 10, 2026
Docket number
2:25-cv-00440-LEW
Procedural posture
Plaintiff moved to remand a removed state-court action to Maine Superior Court for lack of diversity jurisdiction because the amount in controversy did not exceed $75,000.
Standard of review
The removing party bears the burden of establishing federal subject-matter jurisdiction, including that the amount in controversy will exceed $75,000 to a reasonable probability. Attorney's fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) are available only when the removing party lacked an objectively reasonable basis for removal, absent unusual circumstances.
Precedential value
unpublished district court order; precedential status unknown
Disposition
remanded

Topics

subject matter jurisdictionattorney feescivil procedure

Practice areas

civil procedurefederal jurisdictionremedies

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the amount in controversy in the removed action could reasonably be expected to exceed $75,000 for purposes of diversity jurisdiction.
  2. Whether the removal lacked an objectively reasonable basis such that Brubaker could recover attorney's fees and costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c).

Holdings

  1. Amazon failed to establish to a reasonable probability that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, so removal based on diversity jurisdiction was not justified.
  2. Because Amazon lacked an objectively reasonable basis for removal, Brubaker may petition for attorney's fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) for work related to the remand motion and reply.

Key quotations

As the proponent of federal jurisdiction, Amazon has the burden to establish that the amount in controversy “exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.”
The standard requires a showing that the jurisdictional threshold will be crossed to a “reasonable probability.”
I agree with Brubaker that Amazon has not met its burden of establishing that the amount in controversy here could exceed the $75,000 threshold.
Absent unusual circumstances, courts may award attorney’s fees under § 1447(c) only where the removing party lacked an objectively reasonable basis for seeking removal.

Factual background

Brubaker asserted a single claim under 26 M.R.S. § 631, alleging that Amazon failed to produce his complete personnel file. He sought an injunction requiring production of the file, a $500 statutory forfeiture, and attorney's fees. The parties agreed that they were diverse but disputed whether the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000, with Amazon relying principally on the possibility of a substantial fee award.

Procedural history

Brubaker filed a Maine statutory claim in Maine Superior Court alleging that Amazon failed to produce his complete personnel file. Amazon removed the action to the United States District Court for the District of Maine on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. The district court granted Brubaker's motion to remand and authorized him to petition for fees and costs related to the remand motion.

Remand instructions

The case is remanded to Maine Superior Court. Within 30 days after entry of the order, Brubaker may petition for a fee award under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c), calculated under the lodestar method and limited to work related to the remand motion and reply.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…