Karl

Karl v. Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaNovember 9, 20223:22-cv-03435California2,278 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES KARL, Plaintiff, No. C 22-03435 WHA

v.

ZIMMER BIOMET HOLDINGS, INC., et ORDER REMANDING CASE al., 14 Defendants.

16 INTRODUCTION In this employment action, plaintiff sues his former employer and supervisor for retaliation. The employer removed the action on the basis of diversity jurisdiction, claiming fraudulent joinder of the supervisor. Plaintiff now seeks to remand the action to state court. For the reasons stated below, plaintiff’s motion to remand is GRANTED. STATEMENT This is a satellite suit following an employment class action, Karl v. Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc., No. C 18-04176 WHA. Orders therein detailed the facts (see, e.g., Dkt. Nos. 127, 169, 204). In short, defendant Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc., sold medical devices. Plaintiff James Karl was employed by Zimmer Biomet as a sales associate and served as a class representative in the class action, the focus of which was…

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.