Jance M. Weberman, A Professional Law Corporation v. Noble Collection, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaSeptember 19, 20242:24-cv-05230California376 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

DISCUSSION

On April 19, 2024, Plaintiff filed this action in state court, asserting state law claims against Defendants. On April 22, 2024, Plaintiff personally emailed the

CV-90 (12/02) CIVIL MINUTES — GENERAL Initials of Deputy Clerk DT

Defendant Shaul Cohen the complaint and summons. (Dkt. No. 9). On May 10, 2024, Defendants’ attorney emailed Plaintiff stating he needed Defendant Cohen’s approval prior to accepting service. (Id.). On May 15, 2024, Plaintiff served Defendant Cohen via substituted service at Defendant Noble Collection’s address in New York. (Id.). Additionally, on May 15, 2024, Plaintiff mailed the documents to Defendant Noble Collection’s New York address from Los Angeles. (Id.). On June 21, 2024, Defendants removed the action under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) based on diversity jurisdiction. (Dkt. No. 1). The diversity of parties is not at issue. On July 3, 2024, Plaintiff filed the present motion, alleging Defendants were untimely in removing the case. Plaintiff asserts the date of service is May 15, 2024, the date Mr. Cohen was served via substituted service. In its opposition, Defendants assert the date of service is…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.