REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

KELLY K.E. MAHONEY, Chief Magistrate Judge.

These cases were removed from state court based on diversity jurisdiction. No. 19-CV-4032-LTS-KEM, Doc. 1; No. 19-CV-4033-LTS-KEM, Doc. 1. Diversity jurisdiction does not exist because both Plaintiffs and Defendant are citizens of Iowa. See No. 19-CV-4032-LTS-KEM, Doc. 4; No. 19-CV-4033-LTS-KEM, Doc. 5. I previously filed an order noting that Plaintiffs' complaints appeared to raise only state-law claims and ordering Defendant to establish subject-matter jurisdiction by a particular date. No. 19-CV-4032-LTS-KEM, Doc. 17; No. 19-CV-4033-LTS-KEM, Doc. 17. I held a status conference with the parties on October 11, 2019, at which Plaintiffs confirmed they raised only state-law claims and do not intend to file any federal claims. No. 19-CV-4032-LTS-KEM, Doc. 20; No. 19-CV-4033-LTS-KEM, Doc. 20. Defendant noted they removed the case based on language in Plaintiffs' complaint based on an abundance of caution to preserve their right to remove if Plaintiffs raised federal claims. The parties agreed that the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over these cases.

Notwithstanding the time limits imposed by statute to object to an improperly removed case, "[i]f at any time before final judgement, it appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded." Caterpillar Inc. v. Lewis, 519 U.S. 61, 69 (1996) (quoting 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c)). Accordingly, I respectfully recommend that the district court remand these cases to state court for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.