Hopkins
Roger B. Hopkins and Sandy Hopkins v. Ford Motor Company; and Does 1 through 10, inclusive
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 ROGER B. HOPKINS AND SANDY No. 2:25-cv-00030-JAM-AC
HOPKINS,
10 Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ v. MOTION TO REMAND 12 FORD MOTOR COMPANY; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants. 15 This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Roger and Sandy Hopkins’ motion to remand. ECF No. 13-1, Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Points and Authorities (“Mot.”). Defendant Ford Motor Company filed an opposition (ECF No. 16 (“Opp’n”)); Plaintiffs did not reply. For the following reasons, Plaintiffs’ motion is denied.1 I. BACKGROUND In 2024, Plaintiffs initiated a lawsuit in Yolo County Superior Court, arising out of their 2018 purchase of a Ford Explorer (the “Subject Vehicle”), which they claim is defective. See generally Mot. at 1-2; Opp’n at 2. Defendant then removed 27 1 This motion was determined to be suitable for decision without oral argument. E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(g); see also ECF No. 17. 1 …