Legal Opinion

Cecile Kasengela v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, et al.

District Court, C.D. California

Decided August 20, 2026No. 2:26-cv-01666Unknown

1Opinion

1 JS-6 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CECILE KASENGELA, Case No. 2:26-cv-01666-WLH-CTS 12 Plaintiff, ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 13 v. TO REMAND [49] 14 KAISER FOUNDATION HOSPITALS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 18 19 The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff Cecile Kasengela’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion to 20 Remand (the “Motion”). (Mot., Dkt. No. 49). Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 21 Procedure 78 and Local Rule 7-15, the Court finds this matter appropriate for decision 22 without oral argument. For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS the Motion…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. Metropolitan Life Insurance v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. San Diego Building Trades Council v. GarmonSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  4. Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. LueckSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  5. Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. SheetsSupreme Court of the United States · 1941

20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API