Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-01656/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-cv-01656-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrimination

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

On July 8, 2005, the above-titled action was reassigned to the undersigned.

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERT WAGLE,

Plaintiff,

 v.

HEARST COMMUNICATIONS, et al.,

Defendants /

No. C-05-1656 MMC

ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO

SHOW CAUSE WHY DEFENDANT

MICHELLE REBER SHOULD NOT BE

DISMISSED

Before the Court is defendant Hearst Communications’ (“Hearst”) Notice of

Removal, filed April 21, 2005.1

 In its notice of removal, Hearst asserts the district court has

diversity jurisdiction over plaintiff’s complaint. Hearst avers that plaintiff and Hearst are

diverse. The other named defendant, Michelle Reber (“Reber”), plaintiff alleges, is a nurse

employed by Hearst; Hearst denies employing a person by that name, but concedes having

previously employed a “Jennifer Reber.” In any event, Hearst asserts, the district court

should disregard the citizenship of the individual defendant because she is a “sham

defendant,” (see Notice of Removal ¶ 7), i.e., a fraudulently-joined defendant.

“Fraudulent joinder is a term of art.” McCabe v. General Foods Corp., 811 F. 2d

1336, 1339 (9th Cir. 1987). “If the plaintiff fails to state a cause of action against a resident

defendant, and the failure is obvious according to the settled rules of the state, the joinder

of the resident defendant is fraudulent.” Id. Where a defendant has been fraudulently
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Under Rule 21, a party “may be dropped . . . by order of the court . . . of its own

initiative at any stage of the action and on such terms as are just.” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 21.

3

Plaintiff fails to allege, for example, why Reber would have any obligation to

personally contact plaintiff.

2

joined as a party, a district court should dismiss such defendant pursuant to Rule 21 of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.2

 See Graphic Resources Group, Inc. v. Honeybaked

Ham Co., 51 F. Supp. 2d 822, 829 (E.D. Mich. 1999) (holding where “no reasonable basis”

to support claim against non-diverse defendant exists, such defendant is “improperly and

fraudulently joined” and should be dismissed as party pursuant to Rule 21).

Here, the sole cause of action alleged against Reber is a claim for retaliation under

the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”). Plaintiff alleges that after Hearst refused

to allow plaintiff to return to work following an injury, plaintiff filed a claim with the

Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”), alleging a claim of disability

discrimination against Hearst, (see Compl. ¶¶ 13, 30), and thereafter Reber “refused to

contact [p]laintiff because he filed a charge with the DFEH.” (See Compl. ¶ 32.) Plaintiff

has not, however, alleged that Reber subjected plaintiff to an adverse employment action.3

Without such an allegation, plaintiff does not state a retaliation claim against Reber under

settled California law. See, e.g., Iwekaogwu v. City of Los Angeles, 75 Cal. App. 4th 803,

814-15 (1999) (holding, to establish claim of retaliation under FEHA, plaintiff must show,

inter alia, defendant subjected him to adverse employment action).

Accordingly, plaintiff is hereby ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing not to

exceed ten pages, exclusive of exhibits, and no later than July 29, 2005, why the individual

defendant should not be dismissed pursuant to Rule 21. Hearst may file a reply to

plaintiff’s response, not to exceed ten pages, exclusive of exhibits, no later than August 5,

2005.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 14, 2005 /s/ Maxine M. Chesney 

MAXINE M. CHESNEY

United States District Judge