Aaron Cordero v. C.R. England, Inc.
Opinion
trial_court Opinion
I. BACKGROUND
On October 21, 2020, Plaintiff filed his Complaint in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Bernardino against Defendant C.R. England, Inc., and Doe Defendants. (“Complaint,” Dkt. No. 1-2.) The Complaint alleges violation of the Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), California Labor Code § 2698 et seq. (Complaint.)
On December 31, 2020, Defendant removed the action to federal court. (“Notice of Removal,” Dkt. No. 1.) Plaintiff filed the Motion on February 22, 2021. Defendant opposed the Motion on March 8, 2021. (“Opposition,” Dkt. No. 16). Plaintiff replied in support of the Motion on March 22, 2021. (“Reply,” Dkt. No. 17.) On March 26, 2021, Defendant filed an ex parte application for leave to file a sur-reply responding to arguments in Plaintiff’s Reply. (Dkt. No. 18.) On March 29, 2021, Plaintiff opposed. (Dkt. No. 19.) This application is DENIED.
II. LEGAL STANDARD
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a), a defendant may remove a matter to federal court where the district court would have original jurisdiction. Caterpillar, Inc. v. Williams, 482 U.S. 386, 392 (1987). Federal courts have limited jurisdiction, “possessing…