Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02054/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02054-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 450
Nature of Suit: Interstate Commerce
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BIO-RAD LABORATORIES, INC.;

FALVEY CARGO UNDERWRITING, LTD;

and CONTINENTAL INSURANCE

COMPANY,

Plaintiffs,

v.

EAGLE GLOBE LOGISTICS, and DOES

1 - 11,

Defendants

CIV-S-05-2054 DFL PAN 

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION

AND ORDER

Plaintiffs Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. (“Bio-Rad”), Falvey

Cargo Underwriting, Ltd., and Continental Insurance Company move

to remand this action to state court. Defendant Eagle Globe

Logistics (“EGL”) asserts that jurisdiction is proper under the

Carmack Amendment, 49 U.S.C. § 14706. 

The parties do not dispute that the Carmack Amendment

completely preempts state law claims for damages arising out of

an interstate shipment of cargo when the shipment is carried 

entirely by ground transportation. (Reply at 2; Opp’n at 2.) 

Case 2:05-cv-02054-RRB-EFB Document 21 Filed 02/01/06 Page 1 of 3
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

 EGL asserts that the Carmack Amendment applies even if the 1

cargo was transported by air because the parties contracted for

ground carriage. However, the statute refers to the actual

method of shipment, not the method of shipment for which the

parties contracted, and expressly exempts air shipments from its

coverage. 49 U.S.C. § 13506(a)(8)(B). Moreover, EGL cites no

case in which a court applied the Carmack Amendment to a package

shipped by air. 

2

The parties also do not dispute that, where it applies, the

Carmack Amendment provides a basis for federal jurisdiction. 

(Id.) Therefore, if the equipment at issue was shipped from Salt

Lake City to Benicia exclusively by truck, the court has

jurisdiction and the motion to remand must be denied. See Hughes

Aircraft Co. v. North American Van Lines, Inc., 970 F.2d 609, 611

(9th Cir. 1992); Adams Express v. Croninger, 226 U.S. 491, 505-

06, 33 S.Ct. 148 (1912). However, if the equipment was

transported by air as part of its “continuous movement” from Salt

Lake City to Benicia, then the Carmack Amendment does not apply

and the court lacks jurisdiction to hear the case. See 49 U.S.C.

§ 13506(a)(8)(B) (exempting from coverage under the Carmack

Amendment the “transportation of property (including baggage) by

motor vehicle as part of a continuous movement which . . . has

been or will be transported by an air carrier.”); see also E.J.

Rogers, Inc. v. UPS, 338 F.Supp.2d 935, 938 (S.D. Ind. 2004)

(finding that the Carmack Amendment does not apply to cargo that

has been, or will be, shipped by air); EIJ, Inc. v. UPS, 2004

U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18481, at *12 (C.D. Cal. 2004) (same). 

1

Because the resolution of this motion depends on whether the

equipment at issue was transported by air at any point in its

Case 2:05-cv-02054-RRB-EFB Document 21 Filed 02/01/06 Page 2 of 3
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

3

journey, the court now opens a limited discovery period so the

parties can further investigate this issue. Discovery at this

time is limited to resolving the issue of the manner in which the

equipment was transported from Salt Lake City to Benicia. 

Discovery on this issue shall close on Friday, March 10, 2006. 

If, at the close of this discovery period, both parties

agree that the equipment was, or was not, transported by air,

then the parties shall submit a joint filing detailing their

conclusion. If this issue remains disputed at the close of the

limited discovery period, then Bio-Rad shall file a supplemental

brief in support of its motion to remand no later than Wednesday,

March 22, 2006. EGL’s opposition shall be filed no later than

Wednesday, April 5, 2006. Bio-Rad’s reply shall be filed no

later than April 12, 2006. The hearing will be held on April 26,

2006 at 10:00 A.M. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 1/30/2006.

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-02054-RRB-EFB Document 21 Filed 02/01/06 Page 3 of 3