Gard v. Greyhound Lines Inc

2 FILED IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON Jun 21, 2021 SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON KAREN ELAINE GARD, 10 Plaintiff, NO. 4:21-cv-05070-SAB 11 v. GREYHOUND LINES, INC., ORDER GRANTING 13 Defendant. UNOPPOSED MOTION TO 14 REMAND 16 Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand, ECF No. 6. The motion was heard without oral argument.

18 The parties agree that the amount in controversy in this matter does not exceed $75,000. See ECF No. 7 at 1. To remove a case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction, the removing party must demonstrate that (1) the parties are completely diverse; and (2) the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. 28 22 U.S.C. § 1332; Matheson v. Progressive Speciality Ins. Co., 319 F.3d 1089, 1090 (9th Cir. 2003). Because the amount in controversy does not exceed $75,000, the Court finds it lacks subject matter jurisdiction and remands the above-captioned case to state court.

26 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 27 1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand, ECF No. 6, is GRANTED.

28 2. All pending motions are denied as moot.

1 3. The above-captioned case is REMANDED to Franklin County Superior Court.

3 IT IS SO ORDERED. The District Court Clerk is hereby directed to enter this Order, provide copies to counsel, and close the file.

5 DATED this 21st day of June 2021.

Ooe.

9 £ Li as.

19 Stanley A. Bastian 11 Chief United States District Judge ANTON ON ATI TTRTATACTT ATATHIART TA NORA ANRTT #4