Jackson v. Ceva Logistics

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

SAN JOSE DIVISION

11

12 BYRON JACKSON, Case No. 19-CV-07657-LHK

13 Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

REMAND

14 v. Re: Dkt. No. 20 15 CEVA LOGISTICS, et al., 16 Defendants. 17 18 Plaintiff Byron Jackson (“Plaintiff”) brings suit against Defendants CEVA LOGISTICS 19 (“CEVA”), RANDSTAD INC. (“Randstad”), and TESLA MOTORS (“Tesla”) (collectively, 20 “Defendants”) for violations of California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), 21 intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent infliction of emotional distress. Before 22 the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to remand. Having considered the parties’ submissions, the 23 relevant law, and the record in this case, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion to remand.1 24 I. BACKGROUND 25

26 1 Plaintiff’s motion to remand contains a notice of motion that is separately paginated from the memorandum of points and authorities in support of the motion. See ECF No. 20 at i-ii. Civil 27 Local Rule 7-2(b) provides that the notice of…