Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-00152/USCOURTS-cand-4_08-cv-00152-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal- Labor/Mgmnt. Relations

---

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO REMAND CASE TO STATE COURT 

Case No. 08-CV-00152-CW

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

DAVID R. ONGARO, State Bar No. 154698 

DAVID R. BURTT, State Bar No. 201220 

JONMI N. KOO, State Bar No. 233136 

PERKINS COIE LLP

Four Embarcadero Center, Suite 2400 

San Francisco, CA 94111-4131 

Telephone: (415) 344-7000 

Facsimile: (415) 344-7050 

Attorneys for Defendant 

INTERSTATE DISTRIBUTOR CO. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

MARTIN MARINE, on behalf of himself and all 

others similarly situated, 

 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

 

INTERSTATE DISTRIBUTOR CO., a 

Washington corporation doing business in 

California, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, 

 Defendants. 

No. 08-CV-00152-CW 

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

REMANDING CASE TO STATE 

COURT 

WHEREAS, on November 28, 2007, Plaintiff Martin Marine filed the above-captioned 

case (the “Action”), bearing state court case number RG07358277, in the Superior Court of 

California, County of Alameda; 

WHEREAS, on January 9, 2008, Defendant Interstate Distributor Co. removed the 

Action to the United States District Court, Northern District of California on the basis of 

diversity jurisdiction; 

WHEREAS, on February 8, Plaintiff filed a motion to remand this case to state court, 

representing that his total damages under his first three causes of action do not exceed $75,000; 

Case 4:08-cv-00152-CW Document 8 Filed 03/06/08 Page 1 of 3
- 2 - 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO REMAND CASE TO STATE COURT 

Case No. 08-CV-00152-CW 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

WHEREAS, while the parties disagree on the exact amount of potential damages 

awardable under the first three causes of action, the parties have nevertheless agreed to remand 

this Action to the Superior Court of California, County of Alameda; 

THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties, through 

their counsel of record, that this Action is remanded to the Superior Court of California, County 

of Alameda. Plaintiff and Defendant therefore respectfully request that this court remand this 

case to state court and enter the attached [Proposed] Order. 

DATED: February 20, 2008 PERKINS COIE LLP 

By: /s/ 

 David R. Burtt 

 

 Attorneys for Defendant 

 INTERSTATE DISTRIBUTOR CO. 

DATED: February 20, 2008 KEEGAN & BAKER LLP 

By: /s/ 

 Patrick N. Keegan 

 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

 MARTIN MARINE 

ORDER

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, this court hereby orders that this case 

immediately be remanded to state court. 

3/6/08 

Dated: _________________________________________ 

 DISTRICT COURT JUDGE CLAUDIA WILKEN 

Case 4:08-cv-00152-CW Document 8 Filed 03/06/08 Page 2 of 3
- 3 - 

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO REMAND CASE TO STATE COURT 

Case No. 08-CV-00152-CW 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

CERTIFICATION BY DAVID R. BURTT PURSUANT TO GENERAL RULE NO. 45, 

SECTION X. RE E-FILING ON BEHALF OF MULTIPLE SIGNATORIES 

1. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the state of California, and am a 

partner of the law firm of Perkins Coie LLP, counsel for defendant Interstate Distributor Co. in 

this matter. The statements herein are made on my personal knowledge, and if called as a 

witness I could and would testify thereto. 

2. The above e-filed document contains multiple signatures. I declare that 

concurrence has been obtained from the other signatory to file this jointly prepared document 

with the Court. Pursuant to General Rule No. 45, I shall maintain records to support this 

concurrence for subsequent production for the court if so ordered, or for inspection upon request 

by a party until on year after final resolution of the action (including appeal, if any). 

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of California that the 

foregoing is true and correct on this 20th day of February 2008. 

 /s/ 

David R. Burtt 

64579-0001/LEGAL13996731.1 

Case 4:08-cv-00152-CW Document 8 Filed 03/06/08 Page 3 of 3