Guancione

Guancione v. Espinosa

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 14, 20235:23-cv-01935California2,919 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 ROSALIE GUANCIONE©, Case No. 23-cv-01935-BLF

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

v. REMAND AND GRANTING MOTION

TO DISMISS AND DISSOLVE TRO

JAIME ESPINOZA, [Re: ECF Nos. 11, 14, 15, 18, 19] Defendant.

12 Now before the Court for consideration are the motions to strike removal and to remand filed by Plaintiff Rosalie Guancione© (“Plaintiff”) and the motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and to dissolve the civil Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”) filed by Defendant Jaime Espinoza1 (“Defendant”). The Court has considered the parties’ papers, relevant legal authority, and the record in this case, and it finds this matter suitable for disposition without oral argument. See Civ. L.R. 7-1(b). The Court HEREBY VACATES the hearing scheduled for September 21, 2023. See ECF No. 11. For the following reasons, Plaintiff’s motion to remand is DENIED and Defendant’s motion to…

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.