Emmons et al v. Quest Diagnostics Clinical Laboratories, Inc. et al

Filing 59

ORDER Thereon Granting Stipulation (Doc. 58) Regarding Further Proceedings on Removal and Remand. In view of the parties stipulation, and good cause existing therefore, the Court hereby orders as follows: a) Defendants may file an amended notice of removal along with supplemental evidence supporting jurisdiction by June 30, 2015; b) If after evaluating Defendants amended notice Plaintiffs continue to challenge jurisdiction, they will file a motion for remand by July 21, 2015; c) Plaintiffs moti on for remand, if filed, will proceed as a regular motion pursuant to Local Rule 230(c) and the Courts scheduling calendar, with Defendants having the opportunity to submit an opposition to the motion and Plaintiffs having the opportunity to submit a reply in connection with the motion in accordance with the applicable rules and standards. signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 5/11/2015. (Herman, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

DOROTHEA EMMONS and LISA
STAPLETON, individually, and on behalf of
other members of the general public similarly
situated, and as aggrieved employees,
Plaintiffs,

13
v.

14
15
16
17
18
19

QUEST DIAGNOSTICS CLINICAL
LABORATORIES, INC., a Delaware
corporation; QUEST DIAGNOSTICS
INCORPORATED, doing business as QUEST
DIAGNOSTICS INCORPORATED OF
NEVADA, a Nevada corporation; QUEST
DIAGNOSTICS NICHOLS INSTITUTE, a
California corporations; DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive,

20

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. Case No. 1:13-cv-00474-AWI-BAM

ORDER THEREON GRANTING
STIPULATION REGARDING FURTHER
PROCEEDINGS ON REMOVAL AND
REMAND

21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ACTIVE 207510681v.1

[PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER

ORDER

1

In view of the parties’ stipulation, and good cause existing therefore, the Court hereby orders

2
3

as follows:
a) Defendants may file an amended notice of removal along with supplemental evidence

4

supporting jurisdiction by June 30, 2015;

5

b) If after evaluating Defendants amended notice Plaintiffs continue to challenge

6

jurisdiction, they will file a motion for remand by July 21, 2015;

7

c) Plaintiffs motion for remand, if filed, will proceed as a regular motion pursuant to

8

Local Rule 230(c) and the Court’s scheduling calendar, with Defendants having the

9
10

opportunity to submit an opposition to the motion and Plaintiffs having the

11

opportunity to submit a reply in connection with the motion in accordance with the

12

applicable rules and standards.

13
IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15
16

Dated:

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

ACTIVE 207510681v.1

May 11, 2015

/s/ Barbara

A. McAuliffe

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE