Free Motion to Remand - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-05110-WHA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Document 4

Filed 11/05/2007

Page 1 of 2

JULIO RAMOS, (SBN. 189944) Attorney at Law 35 Grove Street, Suite 107 San Francisco, California 94102 Telephone: (415) 948-3015 Facsimile: (415) 469-9787 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION AMY HARRINGTON, on behalf of herself ) and all others similarly situated, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) MATTEL, INC., a Delaware Corp., and ) FISHER-PRICE, INC., a Delaware Corp., ) and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, ) ) Defendants. ) ) CIV. N0. 07-5110 (MJJ) NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO REMAND; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES AND DECLARATION OF JULIO RAMOS IN SUPPORT OF REMAND Date: December 11, 2007 Time: 9:30 a.m. Dept.: Courtroom 11 CLASS ACTION

TO DEFENDANTS MATTEL, INC., AND FISHER-PRICE, INC. AND THEIR 17 ATTORNEYS OF RECORD, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: that on December 11, 2007 18 at 9:30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard by the above-entitled Court, located 19 at United States District Court, Northern District of California, 450 Golden Gate Ave., San 20 Francisco, California, in courtroom 11 of the Honorable Martin J. Jenkins, Plaintiffs will and 21 hereby do move the Court for remand of the original Harrington v. Mattel, Inc. et. al,, 22 CGC-07-466376, filed on August 20, 2007 and assigned to San Francisco Superior Court Judge 23 John E. Munter for all purposes. 24 motion is brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1447, on the grounds that Mattel, Inc. has failed 25 to sustain its preponderance of the evidence burden that the requirements for original 26 jurisdiction in this federal court have been met. 27 Inc., has its principal place of business in California and the controversy falls under the 28 The primary defendant in this action Mattel This case was originally filed on August 20, 2007. This

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO REMAND

Case 3:07-cv-05110-WHA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Document 4

Filed 11/05/2007

Page 2 of 2

an exception to the Class Action Fairness Act. Therefore, the federal court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over this case. Plaintiffs seek attorney's fees against Defendant and

its attorneys, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1447(c) on the ground that Defendants have no reasonable basis for removing the case. This motion is based on this Notice, the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the attached Declaration of Julio Ramos, the pleadings and papers on file herein, and upon such other matters as may be presented to the Court at the time of the hearing. Dated: November 5, 2007 Respectfully submitted,

By: Julio J. Ramos____________ Julio J. Ramos Attorney at Law 35 Grove Street, Suite 107 San Francisco, California 94102 Telephone: (415) 948-3015 Facsimile: (415) 469-9787 Steven M. Nuñez Law Offices of Steven M. Nuñez 3333 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 215 San Diego, CA 92108 Telephone: (619) 296-8400 Facsimile: (619) 296-3700 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

2

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO REMAND