Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 6, 2021

RedWind Renewables, LLC v. Terna Energy USA Holding Corporation

Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Docket
0:21-cv-01580
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
5
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

RedWind Renewables v. Terna Energy USA, Judge Wright remanded the case because Terna removed it after the 30-day deadline.

Who this affects

RedWind Renewables, LLC and Dakota Plains Energy, Inc. obtained a remand of their case against Terna Energy USA Holding Corporation to Hennepin County District Court.

What happened

RedWind Renewables, LLC and Dakota Plains Energy, Inc. sued Terna Energy USA Holding Corporation in Minnesota state court. Plaintiffs served Terna’s registered agent on May 5, 2021, but Terna removed the case to federal court on July 8, 2021. The parties disagreed about when the 30-day removal period began.

The court ruled that service on Terna’s registered agent counted as service on Terna under Minnesota law. The deadline to remove was therefore June 4, 2021, making Terna’s July 8 removal 34 days late.

Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright granted the plaintiffs’ motions and remanded the case to Hennepin County District Court, Fourth Judicial District.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
RedWind Renewables, LLC v. Terna Energy USA Holding Corporation · No. 0:21-cv-01580
Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Date
Dec. 6, 2021

Background

RedWind Renewables, LLC and Dakota Plains Energy, Inc. filed a case against Terna Energy USA Holding Corporation in Hennepin County District Court. On May 5, 2021, the plaintiffs served the summons, complaint, and affidavit of service on Terna’s registered agent, Cogency Global, Inc. Terna removed the case to federal court on July 8, 2021, invoking diversity jurisdiction. The parties had also stipulated to extend Terna’s time to respond to the complaint until July 9, 2021.

The plaintiffs moved to send the case back to state court. They argued that Terna’s 30-day period for removing the case began when the plaintiffs served Cogency on May 5, making Terna’s July 8 removal untimely. Terna argued that the period did not begin until Terna itself received the summons and complaint.

Legal Question

The issue was whether service on Terna’s registered agent started the federal removal deadline under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(1). That statute requires a defendant to file a notice of removal within 30 days after receiving the initial pleading through service or otherwise. The validity of service before removal was governed by Minnesota law.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that Minnesota law requires service on a foreign corporation’s registered agent when the corporation has one. Under the court’s interpretation of Minnesota law, service on the registered agent is service on the corporation. Terna did not dispute that Cogency was its registered agent or that Cogency received the required pleadings. The court therefore concluded that Terna was served on May 5, 2021, even though Terna argued that Cogency had not properly conveyed the pleadings to Terna.

The court rejected Terna’s reliance on cases involving statutory agents. It found that a registered agent differs from an agent designated by statute because the company has meaningful control over its registered agent. The court held that Terna’s 30-day removal deadline was June 4, 2021. Because Terna removed the case on July 8, 2021, the removal was 34 days late.

Disposition

The court granted RedWind Renewables, LLC’s and Dakota Plains Energy, Inc.’s motions to remand. It remanded the case to Hennepin County District Court, Fourth Judicial District.

The authoritative version

Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.