1 JS-6 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ) 11 ) Case No.: CV 19-09902-CJC(Ex) BRAELYNN JANELL BANISTER, ) 12 ) ) 13 ) Plaintiff, ) 14 ) v. ) 15 ) ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S WALMART, INC. and DOES 1 through ) MOTION TO REMAND [Dkt. 10] 16 ) 100, inclusive, ) 17 ) ) 18 Defendants. ) ) 19 ) ) 20 ) 21 22 I. INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND 23 24 On May 3, 2019, Plaintiff Braelynn Banister brought this personal injury tort 25 action against Walmart, Inc. (“Walmart”) and Does 1 through 100 in Kern County 26 Superior Court. (Dkt. 1-3 [Complaint, hereinafter “Compl.”].) Plaintiff alleges that she 27 slipped and fell at a Walmart location in Bakersfield, California and that Walmart’s 1 Plaintiff’s Complaint does not contain information regarding her citizenship or the 2 damages she is seeking. (Id.) After receiving Plaintiff’s interrogatory responses during 3 discovery, Walmart removed the case to this Court, invoking diversity jurisdiction. (Dkt. 4 1 [Notice of Removal, hereinafter “NOR”].) Before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to 5 remand. (Dkt. 10 [hereinafter “Mot.”].) For the following reasons, the motion is 6 GRANTED.1 7 8 II. DISCUSSION 9 10 A civil action brought in state court may be removed by the defendant to a federal 11 district court if the action could have been brought there originally.

(a). 12 The burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction falls on the defendant, and the 13 removal statute is strictly construed against removal jurisdiction. See Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 14

(9th Cir. 1992). “Federal jurisdiction must be rejected if there is any 15 doubt as to the right of removal in the first instance.”

The proper venue for a 16 removed action is “the district court of the United States for the district and division 17 embracing the place where [the state court] action is pending.”

(a). 18 19 Plaintiff filed this action in Kern County Superior Court and the parties engaged in 20 discovery there prior to Walmart’s removal to the Central District of California. 21 (Compl.) However, the federal district embracing Kern County is the Eastern District of 22 California, not the Central District of California. See

(b) (“The Eastern 23 District comprises the counties of Alpine, Amador, Butte, Calaveras, Colusa, El Dorado, 24 Fresno, Glenn, Inyo, Kern . . .). Accordingly, Walmart’s removal to the Central District 25 was improper and the case is remanded for improper venue. See Timm & Meister LLC v. 26

27 1 Having read and considered the papers presented by the parties, the Court finds this matter appropriate 1 || Martinez,

, at *2 (C.D. Cal. June 20, 2019) (remanding a case when 2 || plaintiff initiated it in Kern County Superior Court but defendant removed it to the 3 || Central District instead of the Eastern District). 4 5 || I. CONCLUSION 6 7 For the following reasons, Plaintiff's motion to remand is GRANTED. This 8 |}action is hereby remanded to Kern County Superior Court. J 10 DATED: — January 14, 2020 Ko f (— ae 1 12 CORMAC J. CARNEY 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28