From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barragan v. State Farm Lloyds

United States District Court, Southern District of Texas
Dec 21, 2022
Civil Action 5:22-CV-48 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 21, 2022)

Opinion

Civil Action 5:22-CV-48

12-21-2022

SOLEDAD BARRAGAN, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM LLOYDS et al., Defendant.


ORDER

Marina Garcia Marmolejo United States District Judge.

Plaintiff has filed a motion to remand arguing that Defendant Celine Flores divests this Court of diversity jurisdiction (Dkt. No. 3). The United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) that recommended Plaintiff's motion be denied (Dkt. No. 6). The Report concluded (1) Defendant timely removed this case, (2) the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, and (3) because Plaintiff improperly joined Flores, the parties are completely diverse (id.). No party filed objections within the 14-day objection period. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Accordingly, the parties waived their right to a de novo review of the Report. See id.

Having reviewed the Report and finding no clear error, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report's ultimate conclusions. Plaintiff's motion to remand (Dkt. No. 3) is DENIED. Because Defendant Celine Flores is improperly joined, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to TERMINATE her from this action. Plaintiff Soledad Barragan and Defendant State Farm Lloyds remain active parties.

It is so ORDERED.


Summaries of

Barragan v. State Farm Lloyds

United States District Court, Southern District of Texas
Dec 21, 2022
Civil Action 5:22-CV-48 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 21, 2022)
Case details for

Barragan v. State Farm Lloyds

Case Details

Full title:SOLEDAD BARRAGAN, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM LLOYDS et al., Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of Texas

Date published: Dec 21, 2022

Citations

Civil Action 5:22-CV-48 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 21, 2022)