Beasley v. Tootsie Roll Industries Inc

Background

Maxine Beasley filed the action in Alameda County Superior Court on January 25, 2021. Tootsie Roll Industries removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on February 23, 2021.

Motions

Tootsie Roll filed a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which concerns whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim. Beasley filed a motion to remand, asking the federal court to return the case to state court because it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction. She also requested attorney’s fees incurred in bringing the remand motion.

Ruling

The court held that, under the cited Ninth Circuit precedent, Beasley had not alleged an injury in fact sufficient for Article III standing. Standing is the requirement that a person show a qualifying injury that gives a federal court authority to decide the dispute. Because the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction, it granted Beasley’s motion to remand the case to state court, denied her request for attorney’s fees, and directed the Clerk to return the case to Alameda County Superior Court and close the federal case.

The order therefore granted in part and denied in part the motion to remand. It also denied Tootsie Roll’s motion to dismiss as moot, meaning the court did not decide that motion because the case was being remanded. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers signed the order.