Cheryl Scarini Schloss v. Quantum Materials Corp et al

Filing 17

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO REMAND, OR, ALTERNATIVELY, FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR A HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO REMAND #15 #16 by Judge John W. Holcomb. The Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 1. The Application is GRANTED in part. 2. This action is REMANDED to Riverside County Superior Court. 3. To the extent that Plaintiff seeks any other form of relief through her Application, it is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. MD JS-6. Case Terminated. (lom)

1

J S -6

2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

CHERYL SCARINCI SCHLOSS, Special
Administrator for the Estate of
EDWARD JAMES SCHLOSS,
Plaintiff,
v.
QUANTUM MATERIALS CORP., a
Nevada Corporation; SOLTERRA
RENEWABLE TECHNOLOGIES,
INC., a Delaware Corporation;
STEPHEN SQUIRES, an individual; and
ROBERT PHILLIPS, an individual; and
DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,

Case No. 5:22-cv-00460-JWH (SHKx)
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S
EX PARTE APPLICATION TO
REMAND, OR,
ALTERNATIVELY, FOR AN
ORDER SHORTENING TIME
FOR A HEARING ON
PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO
REMAND
NOTE CHANGES MADE BY COURT

Defendants
_________________________________
AND ALL RELATED CROSS
ACTIONS

23
24
25
26
27
28

1
Order On Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Application to Remand, or, Alternatively, For an Order Shortening
Time for a Hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand
Case No. 5:22-cv-00460-JWH (SHKx)

1

Pending before the Court is the Ex Parte Application of Plaintiff Cheryl Scarinci

2

Schloss, Special Administrator for the Estate of Edward James Schloss, for an Order

3

to Remand, or, Alternatively for an Order Shortening Time for a Hearing on a Motion

4

to Remand (“Application”). Having considered the Application, all papers and

5

arguments in support of the Application, in the absence of any opposition, and finding

6

good cause appearing thereon, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows:

7

1.

The Application is GRANTED in part.

8

2.

This action is REMANDED to Riverside County Superior Court.

9

3.

To the extent that Plaintiff seeks any other form of relief through her

10
11

Application, it is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13
14

Dated: April 4, 2022

John W. Holcomb
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2
Order On Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Application to Remand, or, Alternatively, For an Order Shortening
Time for a Hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand
Case No. 5:22-cv-00460-JWH (SHKx)