Ron Lomboy v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 6, 20254:25-cv-05167California2,204 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 RON LOMBOY, Case No. 25-cv-05167-HSG

8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

REMAND AND TERMINATING

9 v. MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT

10 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., et al., Re: Dkt. Nos. 14, 27 11 Defendants.

12 13 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Ron Lomboy’s motion to remand, briefing for which 14 is complete. Dkt. Nos. 27 (“Mot.”), 28 (“Opp.”), 30 (“Reply”). The Court finds this matter 15 appropriate for disposition without oral argument and the matter is deemed submitted. See Civil 16 L.R. 7-1(b). For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS the motion to remand. Dkt. 17 No. 27. Accordingly, Defendants Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., and Stephen Hitchcock’s motion to 18 dismiss is TERMINATED AS MOOT. Dkt. No. 14. 19 I. BACKGROUND 20 Plaintiff worked at Wells Fargo from 2007 until he was terminated in January 2024. See 21 Dkt. No. 1-3 (“Compl.”) ¶¶ 7, 44. Plaintiff alleges that Stephen Hitchcock was the top decision- 22 maker…

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.