9 Cited authorities

Jefferson County v. Acker
527 U.S. 423 (1999) Cited 609 times
Holding that, as to element three, the moving party must show that the suit is "for a[n] act under color of office," which requires a causal nexus "between the charged conduct and asserted official authority"
Durham v. Lockheed Martin Corp.
445 F.3d 1247 (9th Cir. 2006) Cited 843 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding defendants not charged with notice of amount in controversy until they have "a paper that gives them enough information to remove"
Nelson v. National Aeronautics
530 F.3d 865 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 95 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "treatment or counseling" question should be enjoined because the form "appears to compel disclosure"
U.S. v. Bank of New York Co.
296 U.S. 463 (1936) Cited 235 times
Holding first-filed state cases took precedence over later-filed federal cases
Rule 4 - Summons
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 Cited 72,180 times 128 Legal Analyses
Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time
Section 1441 - Removal of civil actions
28 U.S.C. § 1441 Cited 51,230 times 151 Legal Analyses
Holding that “[a]ny civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction founded on a claim or right arising under the ... laws of the United States shall be removable without regard to the citizenship or residence of the parties.”
Section 1446 - Procedure for removal of civil actions
28 U.S.C. § 1446 Cited 22,464 times 141 Legal Analyses
Granting a defendant 30 days to remove after receipt of the first pleading that sets forth a removable claim
Section 552 - Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings
5 U.S.C. § 552 Cited 12,367 times 558 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Court's entering of a “Stipulation and Order” approving the parties' terms of dismissal did not amount to a “court-ordered consent decree” that would render the plaintiff the prevailing party
Section 1442 - Federal officers or agencies sued or prosecuted
28 U.S.C. § 1442 Cited 5,272 times 90 Legal Analyses
Granting removal power to "[a]ny officer of the United States . . . or person acting under him"

Removal to Federal Court

9 Cited authorities

Holding that, as to element three, the moving party must show that the suit is "for a[n] act under color of office," which requires a causal nexus "between the charged conduct and asserted official authority"

Holding defendants not charged with notice of amount in controversy until they have "a paper that gives them enough information to remove"

Holding that "treatment or counseling" question should be enjoined because the form "appears to compel disclosure"

Holding first-filed state cases took precedence over later-filed federal cases

Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time

Holding that “[a]ny civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction founded on a claim or right arising under the ... laws of the United States shall be removable without regard to the citizenship or residence of the parties.”

Granting a defendant 30 days to remove after receipt of the first pleading that sets forth a removable claim

Holding that the Court's entering of a “Stipulation and Order” approving the parties' terms of dismissal did not amount to a “court-ordered consent decree” that would render the plaintiff the prevailing party

Granting removal power to "[a]ny officer of the United States . . . or person acting under him"