Stephen Speregen v. Southern Glazer's Wine and Spirits LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 STEPHEN SPEREGEN, Case No. 2:24-cv-07198-FLA (BFMx) Plaintiff,

CORRECTED ORDER REMANDING

v. ACTION FOR LACK OF SUBJECT

MATTER JURISDICTION [DKT. 33]

AND ORDER VACATING MARCH

SOUTHERN GLAZER’S WINE AND

31, 2025 ORDER [DKT. 35]1 SPIRITS LLC, et al., Defendants. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 The March 31, 2025 Order, Dkt. 35, was issued erroneously and is hereby VACATED. Federal courts are courts of “limited jurisdiction,” possessing “only that power authorized by the Constitution and statute[.]” Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994); U.S. Const. art. III, § 2, cl. 1. District courts are presumed to lack jurisdiction unless the contrary appears affirmatively from the record. See DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno, 547 U.S. 332, 342 n. 3 (2006). Additionally, federal courts have an obligation to examine jurisdiction sua sponte before proceeding to…