Uribe Vargas v. Cox
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:23-cv-07215
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Uribe Vargas v. Cox, Judge Kaplan required a corrected removal notice by January 19, 2024, or the case would return to state court.
Juan Miguel Uribe Vargas and Devon Lavelle Cox, because the action could be remanded to state court unless an amended removal notice adequately alleged federal subject-matter jurisdiction by January 19, 2024.
What happened
Juan Miguel Uribe Vargas sued Devon Lavelle Cox, and the case was brought from state court to federal court based on alleged diversity jurisdiction.
The court said the notice of removal did not adequately establish federal subject-matter jurisdiction. It identified possible problems involving the citizenship of individuals, corporations, partnerships, or other business entities, as well as whether the case was removed on time.
Judge Kaplan gave until January 19, 2024, to file an amended removal notice that adequately alleged federal jurisdiction. Without that filing, the court said the action would be remanded to state court.
The detailed version
- Uribe Vargas v. Cox · No. 1:23-cv-07215
- Lewis Kaplan
- Jan. 9, 2024
Background
The court stated that jurisdiction was invoked under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the federal statute commonly used for diversity jurisdiction. The action had been removed from state court, but the court did not identify the underlying claims in this order.
Jurisdictional Deficiencies
The court held that the notice of removal failed adequately to allege the existence of subject-matter jurisdiction. It listed possible deficiencies concerning the citizenship of one or more natural persons, corporations, partnerships, limited liability companies, or other business entities. The court also identified a possible failure to adequately allege that removal from state court was timely. The order did not determine which of these listed issues actually applied.
Order and Effect
The court allowed the filing of an amended notice of removal on or before January 19, 2024, if it adequately alleged federal subject-matter jurisdiction. The court stated that, absent that filing, the action would be remanded to state court. Judge Lewis A. Kaplan issued the order. The court did not decide the merits of the parties' underlying dispute.
Classification
This is a procedural order because it addressed whether federal subject-matter jurisdiction had been adequately alleged and set a possible remand to state court, without reaching the merits.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.