Burmeister v. Peterson

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JANE DOE, Case No. 22-cv-03178-VC Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION TO Vv. REMAND DANIEL PETERSON, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 10 Defendants.

The motion to remand is denied. Counsel for the defendants clearly could have done a better job determining whether Simmaron was served, but Simmaron now joins in the removal, and the Court declines to penalize the defendants for the failings of their counsel on this issue.! See, e.g., Destfino v. Reiswig, 630 F.3d 952, 956-57 (9th Cir. 2011), and Leal v. County of San Bernardino, No. EDCV191736JFWSHKX, 2019 WL 5784177, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 6, 2019). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: August 23, 2022 : VINCE CHHABRIA United States District Judge

' Doe attempts to make new arguments for remand in her reply, but those arguments have been forfeited and are meritless in any event.