The People of the State of California v. Kyong Su Kim
8:25-cv-01328
C.D. Cal.Jul 29, 2025Background
- Plaintiffs (State of California and City of Santa Ana) sued Defendants in Orange County Superior Court, alleging the use of properties as "Drug Dens."
- The complaint originally listed Commerzbank AG as a Real Party in Interest.
- Defendants removed the case to federal court, asserting federal question jurisdiction under 12 U.S.C. § 632 due to Commerzbank AG's alleged supervision by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
- Plaintiffs moved to remand the case, arguing lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.
- Plaintiffs dismissed Commerzbank AG after determining it no longer had an interest, leaving only state law claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Existence of federal subject matter jurisdiction | No jurisdiction exists post-dismissal of Commerzbank AG; remand required | Removal was proper due to Commerzbank AG's involvement and alleged federal issues | Remand granted; no federal jurisdiction |
| Award of costs and attorneys' fees | Fees should be awarded because removal was unreasonable, done to delay | Removal was not frivolous; reasonable basis existed under 12 U.S.C. § 632 | No fees or costs awarded |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Chicago v. Int’l Coll. of Surgeons, 522 U.S. 156 (1997) (removal requires original federal jurisdiction)
- Moore-Thomas v. Alaska Airlines, Inc., 553 F.3d 1241 (9th Cir. 2009) (presumption against removal jurisdiction; doubts resolved for remand)
- Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564 (9th Cir. 1992) (defendant has burden to establish propriety of removal)
- Martin v. Franklin Capital Corp., 546 U.S. 132 (2005) (standard for awarding fees on remand is objective reasonableness of removal)