Annette Cody v. P.C. Richard and Son Service Company, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaSeptember 18, 20232:23-cv-03438California841 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES—

GENERAL

Case No. 2:23-cv-03438-SSS-KKx Date September 18, 2023 Title Annette Cody v. P.C. Richards and Son Service Company, Inc.

Present: The Honorable SUNSHINE S. SYKES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Irene Vazquez Not Reported Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorney(s) Present for Plaintiff(s): Attorney(s) Present for Defendant(s): None Present None Present

Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE

MATTER SHOULD NOT BE REMANDED

Federal district courts “have an independent obligation to determine whether subject matter jurisdiction exists, even in the absence of a challenge from any party.” Arbaugh v. Y&H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 514 (2006). “Lack of subject matter jurisdiction may [] be raised by the district court sua sponte.” Allen v. Santa Clara Cnty. Correctional Peace Officers Ass’n, 400 F. Supp. 3d 998, 1001 (E.D. Cal 2019) (citing Ruhgrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 574, 583 (1999)). If at any time before final judgment the district court determines it lacks subject matter jurisdiction…

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.