Sutton v. DCP Operating Company LP et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
THEODORE SUTTON, as Trustee
of the Theodore S. Sutton Inheritance
Trust U/T/D 4/26/2005,
Plaintiff,
v.
DCP OPERATING COMPANY, LP;
DCP HOLDINGS LP; and
PHILLIPS 66,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. CIV-25-1306-D
ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand to State District Court and Brief
in Support [Doc. No. 7]. Defendants filed a response [Doc. No. 11]. The matter is fully
briefed and at issue.
Briefly, Plaintiff’s motion to remand is premised on the misunderstanding that
Defendants being subject to in personam jurisdiction in the District Court of Beaver
County, Oklahoma divests this Court of diversity jurisdiction. [Doc. No. 7, at 1] (“This is
a case arising from property damage and negligence involving a communications tower
located in Beaver County, Oklahoma, wherein the parties to the contract and the
Defendants herein satisfy all necessary legal standards to subject them all to state in
personam jurisdiction, regardless of diversity.”).
Notably, Plaintiff does not dispute the existence of complete diversity among the
parties, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1332. Nor does Plaintiff dispute that the amount in
Case 5:25-cv-01306-D Document 13 Filed 03/23/26 Page 1 of 2

2
controversy exceeds $75,000. Id. Plaintiff further admits that Defendants’ removal was
timely [Doc. No. 7, at 2]. The Court thus finds that it has diversity jurisdiction over this
action, and Plaintiff has failed to provide any sufficient basis to remand this action to state
court. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand [Doc. No. 7] is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 23 rd day of March, 2026.
. DeGIUSTI
Chief United States District Judge
Case 5:25-cv-01306-D Document 13 Filed 03/23/26 Page 2 of 2