Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Cress v. Mitsubishi Chemical Carbon Fiber and Composites, Inc., 2:18-CV-01854-KJM-EFB. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20181121a25 Visitors: 5
Filed: Nov. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 19, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO DISMISS FLSA CLAIMS WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND REMAND THIS ACTION TO STATE COURT KIMBERLY J. MUELLER , District Judge . This Stipulation and Proposed Order is entered into between Plaintiffs Henry Cress and Jeanine Roberts ("Plaintiffs") and Defendant Mitsubishi Chemical Carbon Fiber and Composites, Inc. ("Defendant") (Plaintiffs and Defendant all collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their counsel of record, as follows: WHEREAS Plaintiffs filed a Class Action ag
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO DISMISS FLSA CLAIMS WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND REMAND THIS ACTION TO STATE COURT

This Stipulation and Proposed Order is entered into between Plaintiffs Henry Cress and Jeanine Roberts ("Plaintiffs") and Defendant Mitsubishi Chemical Carbon Fiber and Composites, Inc. ("Defendant") (Plaintiffs and Defendant all collectively, the "Parties"), by and through their counsel of record, as follows:

WHEREAS Plaintiffs filed a Class Action against Defendant in the Superior Court of California for the County of Sacramento, Case No. 34-2017-00222101 on November 13, 2017;

WHEREAS Plaintiffs filed a motion to amend their complaint to include claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") on April 20, 2018;

WHEREAS the Sacramento County Superior Court granted Plaintiffs' motion to amend the complaint to include FLSA claims;

WHEREAS Defendant removed Plaintiffs' lawsuit to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California on approximately June 28, 2018 solely on the basis of federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 with the remaining state law causes of action being maintained through supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367;

WHEREAS the Parties have met and conferred regarding these matters and agreed that Plaintiffs' FLSA claims will be dismissed without prejudice, that supplemental jurisdiction of the remaining state law claims should be denied pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(2)-(3) and Rodriguez v. Emeritus Corp., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151295 (E.D. Cal. 2018), and that the Court should remand the lawsuit back to the Superior Court of California for the County of Sacramento, Case No. 34-2017-00222101;

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the Parties, subject to the approval of the Court, as follows:

1. That Plaintiffs' FLSA claims shall be dismissed without prejudice;

2. That the Court should decline supplemental jurisdiction of Plaintiffs' remaining state law claims;

3. That this case will be remanded to the Superior Court of California for the County of Sacramento, Case No. 34-2017-00222101.

ORDER

The COURT, having considered the above stipulation and finding good cause, HEREBY ORDERS that:

1. Plaintiffs' claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act shall be dismissed without prejudice;

2. Having dismissed Plaintiffs' claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Court declines supplemental jurisdiction of Plaintiffs' remaining claims, which solely arise under state law and would otherwise substantially predominate over the Fair Labor Standards Act claims in this action; and

3. This case will be remanded to state court, Sacramento County Superior Court, Case No. Case No. 34-2017-00222101. A certified copy of this Order shall be mailed by the clerk to the clerk of the Sacramento County Superior Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer