Filed: Mar. 29, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 29, 2019
Summary: ORDER JUAN R. S NCHEZ , Chief District Judge . AND NOW, this 29th day of March, 2019, upon consideration of Defendant Kurtzman Carson Consultants, LLC's Motion to Dismiss, Transfer, or Stay, Plaintiff Aetna Inc.'s opposition thereto, Kurtzman's reply, and the parties' presentations at oral argument on the Motion, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum, it is ORDERED the Motion (Document 15) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Motion is GRANTED insofar as Kurtzman
Summary: ORDER JUAN R. S NCHEZ , Chief District Judge . AND NOW, this 29th day of March, 2019, upon consideration of Defendant Kurtzman Carson Consultants, LLC's Motion to Dismiss, Transfer, or Stay, Plaintiff Aetna Inc.'s opposition thereto, Kurtzman's reply, and the parties' presentations at oral argument on the Motion, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum, it is ORDERED the Motion (Document 15) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Motion is GRANTED insofar as Kurtzman s..
More
ORDER
JUAN R. SÁNCHEZ, Chief District Judge.
AND NOW, this 29th day of March, 2019, upon consideration of Defendant Kurtzman Carson Consultants, LLC's Motion to Dismiss, Transfer, or Stay, Plaintiff Aetna Inc.'s opposition thereto, Kurtzman's reply, and the parties' presentations at oral argument on the Motion, and for the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum, it is ORDERED the Motion (Document 15) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Motion is GRANTED insofar as Kurtzman seeks transfer of this case to the United States District Court for the Central District of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). The balance of the Motion is DENIED.
It is further ORDERED:
• Kurtzman's Motion to Stay (Document 31) is DISMISSED as moot for the reasons discussed in the accompanying Memorandum.
• Aetna's Motion for a Court Order Directing the Return of Property, or in the Alternative, a Protective Order (Document 27) and Kurtzman's Motion for Entry of Qualified Protective Order (Document 43) are DENIED without prejudice to reassertion in the Central District of California.
• Kurtzman's Motion to Strike (Document 44) is DENIED.
The Clerk of Court is directed to TRANSFER the above-captioned case to the United States District Court for the Central District of California.
