Case Information
*1 Case 3:20-cv-08058-SI Document 10 Filed 01/13/21 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ALIITASI T ALAPATI, Case No. 20-cv-08058-SI Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S v. MOTION FOR REMAND,
REMANDING ACTION AND CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN DENYING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FRANCISCO, et al., FOR AN AWARD OF COSTS AND EXPENSES Defendants. Re: Dkt. No. 8
On November 16, 2020, defendant the City and County of San Francisco (“Defendant”) removed this case from San Francisco Superior Court. Dkt. No. 1. Defendant was served with the summons and complaint on October 13, 2020. Id . at 1. Before the Court is plaintiff Aliitasi T. Alapati’s Motion for Remand and request for costs and expenses, filed on December 16, 2020. Dkt. No. 8. A hearing for plaintiff’s motion is scheduled for January 22, 2021. Under Civil Local Rule
7-1(b), the Court determines that this matter is appropriate for resolution without oral argument and VACATES the January 22, 2021 hearing. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS plaintiff’s Motion for Remand and remands this action to the San Francisco Superior Court, and DENIES plaintiff’s request for an award of costs and expenses.
Plaintiff argues that defendant’s notice of removal was untimely and requests an award of costs and expenses. Dkt. No. 8 at 4-5. Defendant concedes that its notice of removal was untimely and does not oppose remand to state court. Dkt. No. 9. at 1. However, defendant argues that an award of costs and expenses is unwarranted because defendant’s error in filing the removal notice was inadvertent and not in bad faith. Id .
The Court agrees that defendant’s notice of removal was untimely. The notice of removal *2 Case 3:20-cv-08058-SI Document 10 Filed 01/13/21 Page 2 of 2 was filed 34 days after defendant was served with the summons and complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1146(b)(1) (“[N[otice of removal of a civil action or proceeding shall be filed within 30 fays after the receipt by the defendant . . . of a copy of the initial pleading”). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS plaintiff’s motion for remand and REMANDS this case to San Francisco Superior Court. The Court DENIES plaintiff’s request for an award for costs and expenses. See Moore v. Permanente Med. Group, Inc. , 981 F.2d 443, 448 (9th Cir. 1992) (“An award of attorney’s fees pursuant to [removal statute] . . . is within the discretion of the district court”).
IT IS SO ORDERED .
Dated: January 13, 2021
______________________________________ SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge
2