Tinoco

Tinoco v. Walmart Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 1, 20205:20-cv-01602California1,760 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 RODRIGO TINOCO, Case No. 20-cv-01602-BLF

8 Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

9 v. REMAND

10 WALMART INC., [Re: ECF 11] 11 Defendant.

12 13 Before the Court is Plaintiff Rodrigo Tinoco’s Motion for Remand. Mot. for Remand, 14 ECF 11. Tinoco brings this suit against Defendant Walmart Inc. (“Walmart”) alleging a failure to 15 accommodate his perceived and/or actual disabilities and wrongful termination of his employment. 16 Compl., ECF 1-2. Defendant removed this action from Santa Clara Superior court on diversity 17 grounds. Not. of Removal, ECF 1. At issue is whether Defendant’s removal was timely as it was 18 filed more than thirty days from receipt of the complaint. The Court finds that the matter is 19 suitable for disposition without oral argument and VACATES the hearing set on July 2, 2020. For 20 the reasons discussed below, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion for Remand. 21 I. …

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.