Clee, III v. Benson Industries, Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WILLIAM CLEE, III, No. 2:24-cv-01529-DAD-AC Plaintiff, v. ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO REMAND
BENSON INDUSTRIES, INC., et al., (Doc. No. 4) Defendants. 16 This matter is before the court on plaintiff’s motion to remand this action to the Sacramento County Superior Court. (Doc. No. 4.) The pending motion was taken under submission to be decided on the papers pursuant to Local Rule 230(g). (Doc. No. 8.) For the reasons explained below, the court will deny plaintiff’s motion to remand. BACKGROUND On February 29, 2024, plaintiff William Clee III filed this putative class action against his employers, defendants Benson Industries, Inc. (“Benson”) and Mitek Inc.1, in the Sacramento County Superior Court. (Doc. No. 1-4 at 7.) In his complaint, plaintiff brings 10 claims under the Private Attorney’s General Act alleging that defendants violated California labor laws by failing to…