Montano v. 7-Eleven, Inc.
- Vince Chhabria
- 3:23-cv-02854
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Montano v. 7-Eleven, Judge Chhabria ordered responses on whether Dana Doe requires remand to state court.
Jeremiah Albert Montano, 7-Eleven, Inc., the other defendants, and Dana Doe; the order could affect whether the case remains in federal court or returns to state court.
What happened
In Montano v. 7-Eleven, Inc., the court questioned whether it has jurisdiction to hear the matter in federal court because of defendant Dana Doe.
The court ordered the defendants to explain why the case should not be sent back to state court. 7-Eleven must respond within 14 days, and Montano may reply seven days afterward. The order does not state that the case has been remanded.
Judge Vince Chhabria issued the order on September 20, 2023.
The detailed version
- Montano v. 7-Eleven, Inc. · No. 3:23-cv-02854
- Vince Chhabria
- Sept. 20, 2023
Background
The case was filed by Jeremiah Albert Montano against 7-Eleven, Inc., and other defendants. At a September 15, 2023, case-management conference, the court raised a question about federal jurisdiction because of defendant Dana Doe.
Order
The court ordered the defendants to show cause—meaning to explain—why the matter should not be remanded, or sent back, to state court because of Dana Doe. The order cited a prior Northern District of California decision as an example. The court directed 7-Eleven to respond within 14 days and Montano to reply seven days after that.
Disposition
The court issued an order to show cause regarding jurisdiction. It did not state that the matter had been remanded or otherwise decide the jurisdiction question. Judge Vince Chhabria signed the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.