In Re Edward Jones Holders Litigation

Good Law
453 F. Supp. 2d 1210·2006 WL 2772638·2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73104
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaSeptember 25, 2006CV06-1974FMC(VBKX)California3,268 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cooper, J.

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO REMAND

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand (docket no. 32), filed May 4, 2006. The Court has considered the moving, opposition, reply and sur-reply documents submitted in connection with the motion. The Court deems this matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 78; Local Rule 7-15. Accordingly, the hearing set for October 16, 2006, is removed from the Court’s calendar. For the reasons and in the manner set forth below, the Court hereby DENIES the Motion.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Defendant, Edward D. Jones & Co., L.P., d/b/a Edward Jones (“Defendant” or “Jones”), is one of the largest brokerage houses in the country, providing clients with investment advice on a variety of investments, including mutual funds, through its network of 9,000 brokers. See Consolidated Amended Individual Complaint, Complaint on Behalf of the Public and Class Action Complaint (“Compl.”), September 16, 2004, ¶ 9. In their operative Complaint, Plaintiffs Todd Bressler and William O. Potter (“Plaintiffs”), individually and on behalf of the public and a Class of others similarly situated, seek…

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.