Cushman v. Physical Rehabilitation Network, LLC

ol} a FILED 5 MAY 15 2024 6 CLERK. U.S. DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 BY DEPUTY 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA |} ANTHONY CUSHMAN, individually Case No.: 3:23-cv-01798-BEN-DDL and on behalf of others similarly situated; CLASS ACTION and MARITZA HERNANDEZ, || individually and on behalf of other ORDER REQUIRING ADDITIONAL 14 similarly situated, BRIEFING 5 Plaintiffs, PHYSICAL REHABILITATION NETWORK, LLC, a Delaware limited || liability company; HEALTHCARE 19 EMPLOYEE SERVICES, LLC, a California limited liability company; and || DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, 51 Defendants.

3 Federal courts have limited jurisdictional power and have a continuing duty to confirm their subject matter jurisdiction. Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env't, 523 5 U.S. 83, 94 (1998). A district court has “an independent obligation to determine that subject matter jurisdiction exists.” Serrano v. 180 Connect, Inc., 478 F.3d 1018, 1021 (9th Cir. 2007).

Accordingly, in connection with the Plaintiffs’ motion for remand, the Court ||hereby ORDERS the parties to submit additional briefing on the following issues: 3 1. The location of the principal place of business of Defendant Physical || Rehabilitation Network, LLC; and 5 2. The location of the principal place of business of Defendant Healthcare ||Employee Services, LLC.

7 The parties shall each file a single opening brief on the issues above no later than ||Friday, May 31, 2024. The briefs shall not exceed five (5) pages (excluding any evidentiary attachments). The parties may file an opposition brief no later than Friday, ||June 7, 2024. The opposition briefs shall not exceed five (5) pages (excluding any 11 evidentiary attachments). There shall be no reply briefing.

13 IT IS SO ORDERED. f\ = 14 Dated: May 15, 2024 15 . ROGER T. BENITEZ United States District Judge