Gail Rubio v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., 5:25-cv-00106

Plaintiff Gail Rubio alleged injuries from a falling box while shopping at a CVS store operated by the Defendants, CVS Pharmacy, Inc. and Garfield Beach CVS, LLC.
She filed a First Amended Complaint ("FAC") in San Bernardino County Superior Court alleging negligence.
Defendants were served with the FAC in October 2024 and answered in November 2024.
On January 15, 2025, Defendants filed a Notice of Removal to federal court, claiming diversity jurisdiction (diverse citizenship and amount in controversy above $75,000).
Plaintiff moved to remand, arguing the removal was untimely because Defendants allegedly had earlier notice of Plaintiff's citizenship.
The court considered whether the Notice of Removal was filed within the required 30-day period under 28 U.S.C. § 1446.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Timeliness of Removal	CVS knew Plaintiff's citizenship earlier; removal late	Citizenship not unequivocally clear until December 16; removal timely	Notice of Removal was timely; removal clock started on December 16

Harris v. Bankers Life & Cas. Co., 425 F.3d 689 (9th Cir. 2005) (removal deadline triggered only when grounds for removal are unequivocally clear on the face of pleadings)
Chavez v. JPMorgan Chase & Co., 888 F.3d 413 (9th Cir. 2018) (requirements for diversity jurisdiction removals)
Luther v. Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP, 533 F.3d 1031 (9th Cir. 2008) (burden on defendant to show removal is proper; doubts resolved in favor of remand)
Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564 (9th Cir. 1992) (strict construction of the federal removal statute against removal jurisdiction)
Kanter v. Warner-Lambert Co., 265 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 2001) (citizenship, not residence, controls diversity jurisdiction)