Gildardo Rocha v. Capstone Logistics, LLC
2:17-cv-08783
C.D. Cal.Feb 13, 2018Background
- Rocha worked for Capstone Logistics as an unloader since 2008; he injured his shoulder in 2014 and received a 15‑pound lifting restriction.
- He was reassigned to light duties, later given leave paperwork and a fitness‑for‑duty exam, and was terminated effective September 15, 2016.
- Rocha sued in Los Angeles Superior Court (July 2017) asserting FEHA disability discrimination, retaliation, wrongful termination, and IIED; defendants removed the case to federal court on diversity grounds (Dec. 2017).
- Two individual defendants (Raul Moreno and Alex Ledesma) and Rocha are California citizens, which, if counted, would destroy complete diversity.
- Defendants argue Moreno and Ledesma were fraudulently joined because the only claim against them (IIED) cannot succeed; the court examined whether the IIED claim is obviously deficient.
- The court concluded the IIED allegations against the individuals were weak but possibly curable by amendment, so the individuals were not sham defendants; complete diversity lacking, the case was remanded to state court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether complete diversity exists for federal diversity jurisdiction | Rocha: No — plaintiff and two individual defendants are California citizens, so diversity is lacking | Defs: Moreno and Ledesma were fraudulently joined (IIED claim cannot succeed), so their citizenship should be disregarded | Court: Not fraudulently joined — IIED claim is weak but not impossible; defendants not shams; no complete diversity; remand granted |
| Whether removal was timely and all defendants consented | Rocha: Removal untimely and lacked consent (alternative grounds for remand) | Defs: Removal proper | Court: Did not decide timeliness/consent because lack of diversity was dispositive |
Key Cases Cited
- Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 267 (U.S. 1806) (complete diversity requirement)
- Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546 (U.S. 2005) (any common citizenship defeats diversity jurisdiction)
- Morris v. Princess Cruises, Inc., 236 F.3d 1061 (9th Cir. 2001) (fraudulent joinder doctrine explained)
- Kruso v. Int’l Tel. & Tel. Corp., 872 F.2d 1416 (9th Cir. 1989) (standard for evaluating sham defendants)
- Hamilton Materials, Inc. v. Dow Chem. Corp., 494 F.3d 1203 (9th Cir. 2007) (presumption against fraudulent joinder)
- Pardi v. Kaiser Found. Hosps., 389 F.3d 840 (9th Cir. 2004) (IIED standard discussion)