UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Case No. 2:25-cv-01870-CBM-KES Date April 8, 2025

Title = Pena etal. v. County of Los Angeles et al.

Present: The Honorable © CONSUELO B. MARSHALL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE V.R. VALLERY NOT REPORTED Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendants: NONE PRESENT NONE PRESENT Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS- ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO REMAND AND PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT The matters before the Court are Plaintiff's Motion to Remand and Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint. (Dkt. Nos. 10, 11 (collectively, the “Motions”).) Plaintiff failed to comply with Local Rule 6-1’s notice requirement and Local Rule 7-3’s meet and confer requirement. See L.R. 6-1 (“Unless otherwise provided by rule or order of the Court, no oral motions will be recognized and every motion shall be presented by written notice of motion. The notice of motion shall be filed with the Clerk not later than twenty-eight (28) days before the date set for hearing, and shall be served on each of the parties electronically or, if excepted from electronic filing, either by deposit in the mail or by personal service. If mailed, the notice of motion shall be served not later than thirty-one (31) days before the Motion Day designated in the notice. If served personally, or electronically, the notice of motion shall be served not later than twenty-eight (28) days before the Motion Day designated in the notice.”); L.R. 7-3 (“[C]ounsel contemplating the filing of any motion must first contact opposing counsel to discuss thoroughly, preferably in person, the substance of the contemplated motion and any potential resolution. The conference must take place at least 7 days prior to the filing of the motion.”). Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motions are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to refiling as a properly noticed motion which complies with all applicable rules, including but not limited to Local Rules 6-1 and 7-3. The parties shall address the applicability of Royal Canin U. S. A., Inc. v. Wulischleger,

(2025), in connection with any further motion to remand that is filed. IT IS SO ORDERED.

oo: