Kimberly Ann Sciandra, as Administrator of the Estate of Marsha Kathleen Sciandra v. Insulet Corporation; Dexcom, Inc.; US Med, LLC; and Cary Endocrine & Diabetes Center, P.A.

Sciandra · United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina · December 2, 2025 · No. 5:25-CV-519-FL

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina grants plaintiff’s motion to remand a products-liability and negligence action involving insulin-delivery and glucose-monitoring devices. The court concludes that the in-state defendant was not fraudulently joined because plaintiff sufficiently pleaded a possible express-warranty claim under North Carolina law, and it declines to sever that defendant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21. The court also grants defendants leave to file a sur-reply, declines to award costs and fees, and remands the case to Wake County Superior Court.

Holdings

  1. Cary Endocrine was not fraudulently joined because plaintiff sufficiently pleaded a possible claim for breach of express warranty under North Carolina law, and defendants did not meet their heavy burden to show that plaintiff could not establish any claim against Cary Endocrine.
  2. The court declined to sever Cary Endocrine under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21 because plaintiff stated a claim against it and the claims against all defendants arose from the same products, death, and alleged incident and involved common questions of law or fact.
  3. Remand was required because Cary Endocrine was a nondiverse defendant whose citizenship could not be disregarded, and no other basis for federal jurisdiction was shown.
  4. The court denied costs and attorney fees because defendants had an objectively reasonable basis for removal.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Cary Endocrine was fraudulently joined so that its North Carolina citizenship could be disregarded for purposes of diversity jurisdiction.
  2. Whether the court could sever the claims against Cary Endocrine under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21 to preserve federal jurisdiction.
  3. Whether defendants should be awarded costs and attorney fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c) after removal.

Disposition

remanded

Cases Cited (13)

  • Mulcahey v. Columbia Organic Chemicals Co., 29 F.3d 148, 151 (4th Cir. 1994)(followed)
  • Palisades Collections LLC v. Shorts, 552 F.3d 327, 336 (4th Cir. 2008)(followed)
  • Weidman v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 776 F.3d 214, 218 (4th Cir. 2015)(followed)
  • Johnson v. American Towers, LLC, 781 F.3d 693, 704 (4th Cir. 2015)(followed)
  • Marshall v. Manville Sales Corp., 6 F.3d 229, 232-33 (4th Cir. 1993)(followed)
  • Hartley v. CSX Transportation, Inc., 187 F.3d 422, 424, 426 (4th Cir. 1999)(followed)
  • AIDS Counseling & Testing Centers v. Group W Television, Inc., 903 F.2d 1000, 1004 (4th Cir. 1990)(followed)
  • Howell v. Cooper, 388 N.C. 71, 77-78 (2025)(followed)
  • Alberti v. Manufactured Homes, Inc., 329 N.C. 727, 737 (1991)(followed)
  • Bernick v. Jurden, 306 N.C. 435, 448, 450 (1982)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 13.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…