Sean Stoddard v. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMarch 31, 20205:20-cv-00386California1,453 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

O

JS-

2 3 4 5 6 7 United States District Court 8 Central District of California 9 10 11 SEAN STODDARD, Case №. 5:20-cv-00386-ODW (KKx) Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING

v.

MOTION TO REMAND [8]; AND

PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY

DENYING AS MOOT MOTION TO INSURANCE COMPANY; and DOES 1 15 through 50, inclusive, DISMISS AND MOTION TO

STRIKE [6][7]

Defendants. 17 I. INTRODUCTION On February 26, 2020, Defendant Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company 20 (“Defendant”) removed this action based on diversity jurisdiction. (Notice of 21 Removal ¶¶ 3–5, ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff Sean Stoddard moves to remand, arguing that 22 Defendant’s removal is untimely (“Motion”). (See Mot. to Remand (“Mot.”), ECF 23 No. 8.) After reviewing the papers filed in connection with the Motion, the Court 24 deems the matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; 25 C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-15. Accordingly, the Court VACATES the hearing on April 13, 26 2020. For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS Stoddard’s Motion and 27…

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.