UCLA-LAW-130 CIVIL PROCEDURE COMPREHENSIVE
EXAM GUIDE 2026 /2027 Q&A
1. A citizen of New York sues a citizen of California in federal court in
California for breach of contract, seeking $80,000 in damages. The
defendant files a motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter
jurisdiction. Which of the following is the correct analysis?
A. The court lacks jurisdiction because the amount in controversy is
less than $100,000
B. The court has jurisdiction because there is complete diversity and
the amount exceeds $75,000
C. The court lacks jurisdiction because breach of contract is not a
federal question
D. The court has jurisdiction because California is the defendant's
home state
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, federal diversity jurisdiction
requires complete diversity of citizenship (plaintiff and defendant
are citizens of different states) and an amount in controversy
exceeding $75,000. Both requirements are met here. The $75,000
threshold, not $100,000, applies
2. Plaintiff, a citizen of Texas, sues Defendant, a corporation
incorporated in Delaware with its principal place of business in Texas,
in federal court for patent infringement. Does the court have subject-
matter jurisdiction?
A. No, because there is no diversity of citizenship
B. Yes, because patent cases arise under federal law
C. No, because the corporation is a Texas citizen
D. Yes, but only if the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Patent infringement cases arise under federal patent
law, establishing federal-question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §
, 1331 regardless of diversity or amount in controversy. Diversity is
not required for federal-question jurisdiction.
3. In a diversity case, Plaintiff (citizen of Illinois) sues Defendant A
(citizen of Illinois) and Defendant B (citizen of Ohio). What is the
jurisdictional problem?
A. The amount in controversy is insufficient
B. Complete diversity is lacking because Plaintiff and Defendant A are
both Illinois citizens
C. Federal courts cannot hear cases with multiple defendants
D. There is no problem; jurisdiction is proper
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: The rule of complete diversity requires that no plaintiff
share citizenship with any defendant. Since Plaintiff and Defendant
A are both Illinois citizens, complete diversity is destroyed.
4. A plaintiff files a complaint alleging violation of a federal statute. The
defendant removes the case to federal court. Later, the plaintiff
amends the complaint to delete the federal claim, asserting only state
law claims. What should the federal court do?
A. Retain jurisdiction because removal was proper initially
B. Remand the case to state court because federal-question
jurisdiction no longer exists
C. Convert the case to a diversity action
D. Dismiss the case with prejudice
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: When the federal claim is removed and only state law
claims remain, the basis for federal-question jurisdiction
disappears. The court should remand to state court unless diversity
jurisdiction independently exists.
,5. Which of the following best describes the "well-pleaded complaint"
requirement for federal-question jurisdiction?
A. The complaint must be professionally drafted
B. The federal question must appear on the face of the plaintiff's
properly pleaded complaint
C. The complaint must allege facts showing likelihood of success
D. The federal question must be raised in the answer, not the
complaint
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Federal-question jurisdiction requires that the federal
issue appear on the face of the well-pleaded complaint, not in a
defense or counterclaim. This is a fundamental requirement for §
1331 jurisdiction.
6. Plaintiff, a California citizen, sues Defendant, a New York citizen, in
California state court for $200,000. Defendant seeks to remove to
federal court. Which statement is correct?
A. Defendant cannot remove because the plaintiff is a citizen of the
forum state
B. Defendant can remove because there is diversity and the amount
exceeds $75,000
C. Defendant cannot remove without plaintiff's consent
D. Defendant can remove only if a federal question is also alleged
Correct Answer: A
Explanation: Under the forum-defendant rule, removal is barred if
any properly joined defendant is a citizen of the state where the
action is brought. However, here the defendant is a New York
citizen, so this rule doesn't apply. Actually, the correct answer is B -
diversity removal is proper when complete diversity exists and
amount exceeds $75,000.
7. A corporation is incorporated in Delaware, has its principal place of
business in Nevada, and maintains a large warehouse in California
where it employs 50 people. For diversity purposes, what is the
, corporation's citizenship?
A. Delaware only
B. Nevada only
C. Delaware and Nevada
D. Delaware, Nevada, and California
Correct Answer: C
Explanation: A corporation is a citizen of both its state of
incorporation AND its principal place of business (nerve center). The
warehouse and employees in California do not make it a California
citizen.
8. Plaintiff sues in federal court asserting a federal claim ($50,000) and
a related state law claim ($30,000) against the same defendant. Both
claims arise from the same transaction. What type of jurisdiction
covers the state law claim?
A. Federal-question jurisdiction
B. Diversity jurisdiction
C. Supplemental jurisdiction
D. Removal jurisdiction
Correct Answer: C
Explanation: Supplemental jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1367) allows a
federal court to hear state law claims that are part of the same case
or controversy as claims over which the court has original
jurisdiction.
9. In a diversity case, Plaintiff asserts two claims against Defendant: (1)
breach of contract for $40,000 and (2) negligence for $40,000, both
arising from the same incident. Does the court have jurisdiction?
A. No, because each claim is under $75,000
B. Yes, because the claims can be aggregated to meet the $75,000
threshold
C. No, because negligence claims cannot be combined with contract
claims
D. Yes, but only if the claims are asserted by a single plaintiff
EXAM GUIDE 2026 /2027 Q&A
1. A citizen of New York sues a citizen of California in federal court in
California for breach of contract, seeking $80,000 in damages. The
defendant files a motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter
jurisdiction. Which of the following is the correct analysis?
A. The court lacks jurisdiction because the amount in controversy is
less than $100,000
B. The court has jurisdiction because there is complete diversity and
the amount exceeds $75,000
C. The court lacks jurisdiction because breach of contract is not a
federal question
D. The court has jurisdiction because California is the defendant's
home state
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, federal diversity jurisdiction
requires complete diversity of citizenship (plaintiff and defendant
are citizens of different states) and an amount in controversy
exceeding $75,000. Both requirements are met here. The $75,000
threshold, not $100,000, applies
2. Plaintiff, a citizen of Texas, sues Defendant, a corporation
incorporated in Delaware with its principal place of business in Texas,
in federal court for patent infringement. Does the court have subject-
matter jurisdiction?
A. No, because there is no diversity of citizenship
B. Yes, because patent cases arise under federal law
C. No, because the corporation is a Texas citizen
D. Yes, but only if the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Patent infringement cases arise under federal patent
law, establishing federal-question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §
, 1331 regardless of diversity or amount in controversy. Diversity is
not required for federal-question jurisdiction.
3. In a diversity case, Plaintiff (citizen of Illinois) sues Defendant A
(citizen of Illinois) and Defendant B (citizen of Ohio). What is the
jurisdictional problem?
A. The amount in controversy is insufficient
B. Complete diversity is lacking because Plaintiff and Defendant A are
both Illinois citizens
C. Federal courts cannot hear cases with multiple defendants
D. There is no problem; jurisdiction is proper
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: The rule of complete diversity requires that no plaintiff
share citizenship with any defendant. Since Plaintiff and Defendant
A are both Illinois citizens, complete diversity is destroyed.
4. A plaintiff files a complaint alleging violation of a federal statute. The
defendant removes the case to federal court. Later, the plaintiff
amends the complaint to delete the federal claim, asserting only state
law claims. What should the federal court do?
A. Retain jurisdiction because removal was proper initially
B. Remand the case to state court because federal-question
jurisdiction no longer exists
C. Convert the case to a diversity action
D. Dismiss the case with prejudice
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: When the federal claim is removed and only state law
claims remain, the basis for federal-question jurisdiction
disappears. The court should remand to state court unless diversity
jurisdiction independently exists.
,5. Which of the following best describes the "well-pleaded complaint"
requirement for federal-question jurisdiction?
A. The complaint must be professionally drafted
B. The federal question must appear on the face of the plaintiff's
properly pleaded complaint
C. The complaint must allege facts showing likelihood of success
D. The federal question must be raised in the answer, not the
complaint
Correct Answer: B
Explanation: Federal-question jurisdiction requires that the federal
issue appear on the face of the well-pleaded complaint, not in a
defense or counterclaim. This is a fundamental requirement for §
1331 jurisdiction.
6. Plaintiff, a California citizen, sues Defendant, a New York citizen, in
California state court for $200,000. Defendant seeks to remove to
federal court. Which statement is correct?
A. Defendant cannot remove because the plaintiff is a citizen of the
forum state
B. Defendant can remove because there is diversity and the amount
exceeds $75,000
C. Defendant cannot remove without plaintiff's consent
D. Defendant can remove only if a federal question is also alleged
Correct Answer: A
Explanation: Under the forum-defendant rule, removal is barred if
any properly joined defendant is a citizen of the state where the
action is brought. However, here the defendant is a New York
citizen, so this rule doesn't apply. Actually, the correct answer is B -
diversity removal is proper when complete diversity exists and
amount exceeds $75,000.
7. A corporation is incorporated in Delaware, has its principal place of
business in Nevada, and maintains a large warehouse in California
where it employs 50 people. For diversity purposes, what is the
, corporation's citizenship?
A. Delaware only
B. Nevada only
C. Delaware and Nevada
D. Delaware, Nevada, and California
Correct Answer: C
Explanation: A corporation is a citizen of both its state of
incorporation AND its principal place of business (nerve center). The
warehouse and employees in California do not make it a California
citizen.
8. Plaintiff sues in federal court asserting a federal claim ($50,000) and
a related state law claim ($30,000) against the same defendant. Both
claims arise from the same transaction. What type of jurisdiction
covers the state law claim?
A. Federal-question jurisdiction
B. Diversity jurisdiction
C. Supplemental jurisdiction
D. Removal jurisdiction
Correct Answer: C
Explanation: Supplemental jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. § 1367) allows a
federal court to hear state law claims that are part of the same case
or controversy as claims over which the court has original
jurisdiction.
9. In a diversity case, Plaintiff asserts two claims against Defendant: (1)
breach of contract for $40,000 and (2) negligence for $40,000, both
arising from the same incident. Does the court have jurisdiction?
A. No, because each claim is under $75,000
B. Yes, because the claims can be aggregated to meet the $75,000
threshold
C. No, because negligence claims cannot be combined with contract
claims
D. Yes, but only if the claims are asserted by a single plaintiff
