ESA Management, LLC v. Kaler

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 ESA MANAGEMENT, LLC, Case No.: 24-CV-01755-CAB-SBC

12 Plaintiff, ORDER 13 v. [ECF No. 8]

15 Defendant. 16 17 After the Court ordered remand, [ECF No. 7], Defendant Timothy Kaler filed a 18 motion to stay that order pending appeal. [ECF No. 8.] As noted in the Court’s prior order, 19 Defendant Kaler has removed his case three times, has had his case remanded each time, 20 and has attempted two appeals that resulted in dismissals on jurisdictional grounds. See 21 ESA Mgmt., LLC v. Kaler, No. 3:23-CV-01324-RBM-MMP, 2023 WL 4932088, at *3 22 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 2, 2023), appeal dismissed, No. 23-55694, 2023 WL 7401409 (9th Cir. 23 Sept. 28, 2023) (“Kaler I”); ESA Mgmt., LLC v. Kaler, No. 3:24-CV-00175-RBM-MMP, 24 2024 WL 3542584, at *1 (S.D. Cal. June 5, 2024), appeal dismissed, No. 24-3590, 2024 25 WL 3548314 (9th Cir. June 20, 2024) (“Kaler II”). 26 This case has been remanded to the state court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c). As 27 two appellate panels have already confirmed, there is no applicable review exception that 28 allows for any further adjudication of Defendant’s case. See 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (order 1 ||remanding a removed action to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant 2 || to § 1447(c) “is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise’). The Court lacks jurisdiction over 3 || this case and accordingly DENIES Defendant’s motion for stay. [ECF No. 8.] No further 4 || filings will be accepted. 5 7 8 || Dated: October 22, 2024 € 9 Hon. Cathy Ann Bencivengo 10 United States District Judge 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28