Rey

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 DIANNA REY, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Case No. 24-cv-04039-JD

Plaintiffs,

SECOND ORDER RE REMAND

v.

BRISTOL HOSPICE, LLC, et al., Defendants.

12 The Court denied without prejudice a request by plaintiff Rey to remand the case to California state court on the basis of the local controversy exception to CAFA jurisdiction with respect to defendant Optimal Health Services. Dkt. No. 34. Remand was denied because the complaint had been drafted for state court purposes and did not provide enough information for the Court to evaluate CAFA-specific issues such as the exception. Id. at 1 (citing Benko v. Quality Loan Service Corp., 789 F.3d 1111, 1117 (9th Cir. 2015)). Rey was granted leave to file an amended complaint to address the local controversy exception, and to file a renewed remand request. Id. at 2. The amended complaint added substantial new factual allegations about Optimal Health. See Dkt. No. 36. Rey…