If the Defendant alleges that minimal diversity was present during its investigation, is the Defendant required to provide evidence of the date when it discovered minimal diversity?

The Defendant has not established the date when it purportedly learned through its investigation that minimal diversity was present. If the Defendant contends that the 30-day period initiated when it discovered the existence of minimal diversity, then Defendant will need to present evidence of this date because the burden of proof remains with the Defendant to demonstrate that the notice of removal is timely. Silva v. ER Sols., Inc., No. CV 09-3365 PA PJWX, 2009 WL 1459679, at *1 (C.D. Cal. May 22, 2009) ("As with all other requirements for removal jurisdiction, the defendant bears the burden of proving the timeliness of its removal . . .").