Opinion
Case No. CV 13-05828 DDP (Ex)
11-04-2013
BIO TRUST NUTRITION LLC, a Texas limited liability company, Plaintiff, v. BILL SILVERSTEIN, an individual, Defendant.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS
ACTION SHOULD NOT BE REMANDED FOR
LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER
JURISDICTION
Parties are ordered to show cause why this action should not be remanded to California Superior Court in light of Judge Klauser's October 17, 2013 order remanding Silverstein v. Bio Trust Nutrition LLC, et al, Case No. 13-7343, to California Superior Court.
In the instant case, Plaintiff Bio Trust Nutrition LLC asks this court to enter a Declaratory Judgment that certain emails allegedly sent by Plaintiff to Defendant did not violate Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17529.5. (See DKT No. 1.) In cases in which a litigant is seeking federal declaratory relief, district courts have the discretion to determine whether to exercise their jurisdiction to entertain such actions. See Wilton v. Seven Falls Co., 515 U.S. 277, 286-87 1995). In considering this determination, there is a presumption against maintaining a federal declaratory action when parallel proceedings are pending in state court. See Brillhart v. Excess Insurance Co., 316 U.S. 491, 495 (1942) ("Ordinarily it would be uneconomical as well as vexatious for a federal court to proceed in a declaratory judgment suit where another suit is pending in a state court presenting the same issue, not governed by federal law, between the same parties.); Chamberlain v. Allstate Ins. Co., 931 F.2d 1361, 1366-67 (9th Cir. 1991) (quoting same). The present case, brought on the basis of diversity jurisdiction, appears to involve the same issue, which solely concerns state law, as Silverstein v. Bio Trust Nutrition LLC, et al., Case No. 13-7343. That case was initially filed in state court, was removed to federal court, and was remanded to California Superior Court on October 17, 2013. (See Case No. 13-7343, DKT No. 12.) As that case is now pending in California Superior Court, it appears that it would be inappropriate for this court to maintain the instant declaratory relief action.
The court also notes that Judge Anderson recently remanded Belly Fat Free, LLC v. Bill Silvertein, Case No. 13-3383, a case apparently involving the same set of emails at issue here, in light of the same pending litigation before California Superior Court. (See Case No. 13-3383, DKT No. 23.)
Parties are ordered to file with the court an explanation of their positions not exceeding five pages by November 13, 2013. IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________
DEAN D. PREGERSON
United States District Judge