David Ettedgui v. WB Studio Enterprises Inc.
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAVID ETTEDGUI, on behalf of Case No. 2:20-cv-11410-MCS-MAA himself and on behalf of all persons similarly situated, ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
REMAND [25] AND DENYING AS
Plaintiff, MOOT MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND
TO CONSOLIDATE [24, 26]
14 v. 15 WB STUDIO ENTERPRISES INC., a 16 Corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,
18 Defendant. 19 20 The Court rejected in David Ettedgui v. WB Studio Enterprises, Inc., Case No. 2:20-cv-08053-MCS-MAA (Ettedgui I) the argument that section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (“LMRA”) preempts Plaintiff’s meal period claim. See Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Mot. to Dismiss (“MTD Order”), ECF No. 35. Pending in this matter, Ettedgui II, is a claim under California Labor Code § 2699, et seq. removed to this Court based on the deficient preemption theory in Ettedgui I. See Not. of Removal, ECF No. 1. Plaintiff’s instant Motion to Remand argues that the MTD Order means that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction…