David C Loudermilk v. FCA US, LLC

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ) 11 DAVID C. LOUDERMILK, et al. ) Case No. 5:24-cv-02261-CV (SHKx) ) 12 ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ ) MOTION TO REMAND 13 Plaintiffs, ) [DOC. # 15] 14 v. ) ) ) 15 FCA US, LLC, et al., ) ) 16 ) Defendants. ) 17 18 On November 22, 2024, Plaintiffs David C. Loudermilk and Jolene M. Loudermilk 19 (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed a Motion to Remand (“Motion”). Doc. # 15. On 20 December 18, 2024, Defendant FCA US, LLC (“Defendant”) filed an opposition to the 21 Motion. Doc. # 18 (“Opp.”). On December 24, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a reply brief. Doc. # 22 19. 23 On February 6, 2025, the Court issued its reassignment order, which vacated the 24 hearing date for this Motion. Doc. # 29. The Court now finds that oral argument is not 25 necessary to resolve the Motion. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b); C.D. Cal. L. Civ. R. 7-15; 26 Willis v. Pac. Mar. Ass’n, 244 F.3d 675, 684 n. 2 (9th Cir. 2001). Having…