UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JS-6 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 8:20-cv-01268-JLS-KES Date: January 12, 2021 Title: Janeen Giusti v. FCA US LLC et al

Present: Honorable JOSEPHINE L. STATON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Melissa Kunig N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS:

Not Present Not Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER (1) GRANTING MOTION TO REMAND (Doc. 17) AND (2) DENYING AS MOOT MOTION TO STRIKE (Doc. 22)

Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand (MTR, Doc. 17) and Defendant’s Motion to Strike the First Amended Complaint (MTS, Doc. 22). Neither party opposed the other’s motion. The Court finds this matter appropriate for decision without oral argument, and the hearing set for January 15, 2021, at 10:30 a.m. is VACATED. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b); C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-15. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand and DENIES AS MOOT Defendant’s Motion to Strike. Plaintiff moved to remand this case on July 30, 2020, with a hearing set for January 15, 2021 based on stipulation of the parties. (See Order Continuing Motion Hearings, Doc. 42). The local rules require oppositions to be filed no later than twenty- one days before the motion hearing. C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-9. The rules further provide that, except for motions for summary judgment, “[t]he failure to file any required document . . . may be deemed consent to the granting or denial of the motion.” C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-12; see also Korkotyan v. FCA US LLC, No. 2:19-CV-07384-ODW-PLAx,

, at *1 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 15, 2019) (granting motion to remand based on defendant’s failure to timely file opposition); Ghazali v. Moran,

(9th Cir. ______________________________________________________________________________ CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 8:20-cv-01268-JLS-KES Date: January 12, 2021 Title: Janeen Giusti v. FCA US LLC et al

1995) (upholding district court’s dismissal of an action based on plaintiff’s failure to oppose defendant’s motion to dismiss as required by local rules). Because Defendant has not filed an opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand pursuant to Local Rule 7-12. Defendant’s Motion to Strike is DENIED AS MOOT. The matter is hereby REMANDED to the Superior Court of California, County of Orange, Case No.: 30- 2020-01142267-CU-BC-CJC, 700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana, CA 92701.

Initials of Deputy Clerk: mku

______________________________________________________________________________ CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL 2