T hi s di s pos i t i on i s not ap p ro p ri at e fo r p u b l i cat i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by N i nth C i r c ui tR ul e 36- 3.

Th e p a n e l u n a n i mo u s l y c o n c l ude s t hi s c a s e i s s ui t a bl e f or de c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R
. A pp . P
. 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T
GA VEN H I LL , P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t,
v. KRI ST AN HI LL
- LOVE, D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 11- 16552 D. C
. No
. 2 : 0 9
- c v - 0 2 7 1 3
- KJ M- DA D
ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e E a s te rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia K i m be r l y J
. M ue l l e r , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry 11, 2013 ** S a n F r a n c is c o , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: S C H R O E D E R , H A W K IN S , an d M U R G U IA , C i rcu i tJu d g es.
P l ai nt i ff G aven H i l l (“ H i l l ”) ori gi nal l y f i l ed thi s su it ag ai nsthi s s i st erK ri st an H i l l
- L ove ( “ H i l l
- L ove”) i n s t a t e c our t , a l l e gi ng da m a ge s e xc e e di ng $100, 000 f or 

# FI LED FEB 15 2 013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. C O U R T OF APPE ALSH i l l
- L ove , ac i t i z en of C a l i f orni a , vi ol a t e d the f

orum de f

e nda ntrul e by 1 r e m o v in g to d is tr ic t c o u rt in C a l i f o r n i a . 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 4 4 1 ( b ) ( 2 ) . H o w e v e r , H ill w a iv ed th e p ro ced u ral d efectb y fai l i n g t o rai se an o b j ect i o n w i th i n th i rty d ays f o llo w in g r e m o v a l. See 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 4 4 7 ( c ) ; L i ve l y v. W i ld O at s M arke t s, Inc. , 456 F .3 d 9 3 3 , 9 3 5
- 3 6 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) ( v io la tio n o f § 1 4 4 1 ( b ) is p r o c e d u r a l a n d aw a iv ab le d e f e c t)
. 2 co n v ersi o n , i n t en t i o n al i n t erferen ce w i th p ro sp ect i v e eco n o m i c ad v an t ag e, u n j u st enri chm ent , i nt enti o n al i nfl i ct i on of em ot i on al di stre ss , and exem pl ary ( pu ni t i ve) da m a ge s . H i l l
- L ove r e m ove d thi s a c t i on t o f ede r a l c our tba s e d on di ve r s i ty . T he 1 di stri ctcourt eventual l y g rant ed sum m ary j ud gm ent t o H i l l -L ov e bec ause H i l l fa i l ed t o m e e ta ny of t h e f

e de r a l c ourt ’ s di s c ove ry de a dl i ne s orde a dl i ne s f ordi s c l os ur e of
w itn e s s e s a n d th u s h a d n o e v id e n c e th a t c o u l d b e p r e s e n te d a t tr ia l to s u p p o rt h is
c l a i ms . W e a f

f i rm. T he r e w a s no e rr ori n de ny i ng H i l l ’ s m o t i o n t o r e m a nd t o s t a t e c our t . T he di s tr i c tc ourtpr ope r l y i gnor e d H i l l ’ s be l a t e d a tt e m pt t o a voi d f e de r a l j ur i s di c t i on a nd adhered t o thi s c i rc ui t ’ s l on gst andi ng rul e thatthe “ prop ri ety of r em ov al i s det erm i ned sol el y on the basi s of the pl ea di ng s fi l ed i n s t at e court , ” W illia m s v . C o s tc o W

h o le s a le C or p. , 4 7 1 F
. 3 d 9 7 5 , 9 7 6 (9 th C i r. 2 0 0 6 ), as H i l l ex p l i ci t l y so u g h td am ag es i n ex cess
o f $ 7 5 ,0 0 0 in h is s ta te c o u rt c o m p la in t. See a l so S i n g er v. S ta te Fa rm Mu t . A u to . In s. C o. , 116 F
. 3d 373, 375 ( 9th C i r . 1997) ( “ E ve nt s oc c u rri n g su b s e que ntt o the i n st i tut i on of

s ui tw hi c h r e duc e the a m ountr e c ove r abl e be l ow the s t a tut ory l i m i tdo3

notous tj ur i s di c t i on. ” ) ( c i t i ng St
. P aul Me r c ur y I nde m . C o. v . R e d C ab C o. , 3 0 3 U
. S. 28 3, 28 8-90 (193 8)). N o r w a s th e r e a n y e rr o r in g r a n tin g H ill- L o v e ’s m o tio n f o rs u m m a ry ju d g m e n t. H i l l utt e r l y f

a i l e d t o c om pl y w i th pr e tr i a l s c he dul i ng or de r s r e ga r di ng di s c ove ry a nd di sc l osure of w i tness es , and he di d not bear hi s bu rden of es t abl i shi ng thatsuch fa i l ure
w a s “ s ubs t a nt i a l l y j us t i f i e d” or “ ha rm l e s s . ” F e d. R
. C i v. P
. 37( c ) ( 1)
. H i l l thus ha d no
a d m is s ib le e v id e n c e to c r e a te a n is s u e o f m a te r ia l f

a c t f o rtr ia l. See Ho

f f m an v. C on str. P rotec t i ve Servs ., 5 4 1 F .3 d 1 1 7 5 , 1 1 8 0 ( 9 th C ir
. 2 0 0 8 ) ( e x p la in in g th a t R u le 37 sanct i on s are approp ri at e e ven i f a l i t i gant ’ s ent i re cause of a ct i on fa l l s)
. H i l l has al so fa i l ed t o m ee t h is bu rden of es t abl i shi ng thatre s j ud i ca t a or c ol l at er al es t op pel
w o u ld ap p ly to a n y o f

th e is s u e s o rc la im s p r e s e n t e d i n th is a c tio n . See L uci do v. Su p e r . C t. , 7 9 5 P .2 d 1 2 2 3 , 1 2 2 5 ( C a l. 1 9 9 0 ) ; M y c oge n C or

p. v . Mons anto C o. , 51 P .3 d 2 9 7 , 2 9 9 ( C a l. 2 0 0 2 )
.. AF F I RME D.