Good v. Google LLC

Background

Diamond Good filed this lawsuit in Santa Clara County Superior Court against Google LLC, Meta Platforms, Inc., Airbnb, Inc., WhatsApp LLC, Hipcamp, Inc., and the “Air France-KLM Group.” The first amended complaint concerned, in part, the cancellation of a flight ticket from Nigeria to an unknown destination.

Good attempted to serve the Air France-KLM Group at an address that was actually the location of its subsidiary, Societe Air France. Societe Air France appeared in the case and removed it to federal court, stating that it had been “incorrectly named as Air France-KLM Group.” Societe Air France described the Air France-KLM Group as a parent holding company and itself as the subsidiary airline. It then filed motions addressing claims against the Air France-KLM Group and opposed another motion on behalf of both entities.

Removal and Remand

Good moved to remand, meaning to return the case to state court. The court held that federal law authorizes only “the defendant or the defendants” to remove a case. Because the complaint and summons named the Air France-KLM Group—not Societe Air France—as the defendant, Societe Air France was not authorized to remove the case.

The court rejected Societe Air France’s argument that it could remove as a misnamed real party in interest. It explained that the Ninth Circuit had rejected that approach and held that only an actual named defendant may remove under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). The court also considered whether the complaint’s allegations nevertheless made Societe Air France an intended defendant. It concluded they did not: the caption and summons named the Air France-KLM Group, and the complaint repeatedly alleged conduct by that group. Two references to “Air France” did not make it clear that Good had named Societe Air France instead.

Requests to Amend the Removal Notice

Societe Air France and the Air France-KLM Group separately requested permission to amend the removal notice so that the Air France-KLM Group would be identified as the removing party. The court explained that amendments may correct defective jurisdictional allegations when the original basis for removal remains unchanged. But the Air France-KLM Group could not amend a notice that it had not filed, and Societe Air France could not cure its lack of authority to remove by amending the notice. The court therefore denied both entities’ requests to amend the original removal notice.

Disposition

Judge Jacquelyn Corley granted Good’s motion to remand. The matter was remanded to Santa Clara County Superior Court. All other pending motions were terminated as moot. The order disposed of the motions listed in the conclusion, including the motion to remand and the requests to amend the removal notice.