Bruce Hymanson v. Mad Dogg Athletics, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedOctober 7, 2019
Docket2:19-cv-06519
StatusUnknown

This text of Bruce Hymanson v. Mad Dogg Athletics, Inc. (Bruce Hymanson v. Mad Dogg Athletics, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bruce Hymanson v. Mad Dogg Athletics, Inc., (C.D. Cal. 2019).

Opinion

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. LA CV19-06519 JAK (MRWx) Date October 7, 2019

Title Bruce Hymanson v. Mad Dogg Athletics, Inc., et al.

Present: The Honorable JOHN A. KRONSTADT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Andrea Keifer Not Reported

Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants:

Not Present Not Present

Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AS TO WHY THIS MATTER SHOULD NOT BE REMANDED FOR LACK OF FEDERAL JURISDICTION

Because federal courts have limited jurisdiction, and the basis for such jurisdiction in this matter has not yet been clearly established, the parties are ORDERED to show cause as to why this matter should not be remanded to the Superior Court. By October 11, 2019, each party shall file a memorandum, not to exceed five pages, stating its position as to whether there is federal jurisdiction over one or more claims alleged in the Complaint. Those memoranda shall address, among other things, the effect, if any, of the analysis by the Federal Circuit in HIF Bio, Inc. v. Yung Shin Pharm. Indus. Co., Ltd., 600 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2010).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

:

Initials of Preparer ak

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Bruce Hymanson v. Mad Dogg Athletics, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bruce-hymanson-v-mad-dogg-athletics-inc-cacd-2019.