Pro 49 Development, LLC v. Ness Express 1, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PRO 49 DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a No. 2:24-cv-01850-JAM-JDP California limited liability company, Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

TO REMAND

v. NESS EXPRESS 1, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; ADAM DECKER, an individual; JOSEPH DECKER, an individual; TOMMY’S EXPRESS LLC, a Michigan limited liability company; RYAN ESSENBURG, an individual; and DOES 1-100, inclusive, Defendants. 21 Before the Court is Pro 49 Development’s (“Plaintiff”) motion to remand. See Mot., ECF No. 8. Ness Express 1 (“Ness”), Adam Decker (“A. Decker”), and Joseph Decker (“J. Decker”) oppose. See Opp’n, ECF No. 18. Plaintiff replied, though it failed to comply with the Court’s order regarding filing requirements. See Reply, ECF No. 20; Order re Filing Requirements, ECF No. 6-2. For the following reasons, Plaintiff’s motion is denied.1 I. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND This controversy arises out of a lease…