The following excerpt is from Rodriguez v. Cal. Dep't of Motor Vehicles, Case No.: 18-cv-00204-AJB-BGS (S.D. Cal. 2018):
Cavallini v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 44 F.3d 256, 264 (5th Cir. 1995). Without this rule, "disposition of the issue [of removal] would never be final, but would instead have to be revisited every time the plaintiff sought to amend the complaint to assert a new cause of action against the nondiverse defendant. . . ." Id. These cases do not stand for the proposition, as defendants assert, that amending a complaint cannot end up revoking a district courts' jurisdiction for purposes of remand. Instead, the underlying rationale is that "a plaintiff cannot defeat removal by amending [the complaint]." Id. at 265.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.