Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04682/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-04682-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 365
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury - Product Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1446 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury

---

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 

STIPULATION TO REMAND ACTION TO STATE COURT; [PROPOSED] ORDER

220951.1 0170-15624 

LAW OFFICES

SHAW, TERHAR &

LAMONTAGNE, LLP

John W. Shaw [State Bar No. 82802] 

SHAW, TERHAR & LaMONTAGNE, LLP 

707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 3060 

Los Angeles, California 90017 

Telephone: (213) 614-0400 

Facsimile: (213) 629-4534 

Attorneys for Defendants 

COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, 

HOMEDICS-U.S.A., INC. (erroneously sued and 

served herein as “U.S.A.-HoMEDICS, INC.”) and 

TAYLOR PRECISION PRODUCTS, INC. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

GINA DRAKE, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

COSTCO WHOLESALE 

CORPORATION, U.S.A.-HoMEDICS, 

INC., TAYLOR PRECISION 

PRODUCTS, INC., and DOES 1 through 

100, inclusive, , 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

Case No. C 06 04682 JW 

STIPULATION TO REMAND 

ACTION TO STATE COURT; 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

Complaint Filed: June 27, 2006 

 The parties, by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate 

and respectfully request that the Court enter an order remanding the action captioned 

Drake v. Costco Wholesale Corporation et. al., Case No. C 06 04682 JW (N.D. 

Cal.) to the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Santa Cruz 

for further proceedings. 

Plaintiff GINA DRAKE (“MS. DRAKE”) alleges that she suffered a 

laceration to her foot on 16 August 2005 . 

This is a product liability action filed by plaintiff GINA DRAKE in the 

California state court based on an incident of 16 August 2005 in which she alleges 

that she was injured from the use of a glass scale distributed by defendant 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

DENIED

Judge James Ware

Case 5:06-cv-04682-JW Document 25 Filed 02/27/08 Page 1 of 3
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 

2 

STIPULATION TO REMAND ACTION TO STATE COURT; [PROPOSED] ORDER

220951.1 0170-15624 

LAW OFFICES

SHAW, TERHAR &

LAMONTAGNE, LLP

HOMEDICS-U.S.A., INC. (“HOMEDICS”) that she purchased from defendant 

COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION (“COSTCO”). 

This is a diversity case removed pursuant to 28 USC 1332. The substantive 

law of the State of California is to be applied. 

The following good cause exists for the Court to grant this Stipulation in its 

entirety: 

The parties have agreed that due to the severity of the injuries and the ongoing medical treatment by the plaintiff, that the interests of justice would be better 

served with the remand of the case so that the plaintiff may complete her medical 

treatment and the defendants have an opportunity to evaluate the injury. The parties 

have indicated their desire to submit this matter to mediation, but cannot proceed 

with meaningful discussions until the plaintiff’s medical treatment has been 

completed. The parties agree that the state court forum would be most amendable to 

such a resolution involving state court issues. 

MS. DRAKE’S medical condition has recently and progressively deteriorated, 

such that it is presently uncertain as to the extent of her claimed injury and damages 

that are at issue in this case. Plaintiff is now claiming a number of worsening 

conditions, including severe and chronic neurological deficits and a severely 

compromised immune system. Her medical treatment is now aggressively treating 

different systemic problems, including RSD. Most recently, in the last few months, 

MS. DRAKE has commenced a new “experimental” type of treatment, including 

gamma globulin injections, in an attempt to boost her immune system. Each 

treatment costs $40,000.00. She receives one treatment each month. Plaintiff has 

identified for the first time those doctors involved in the latest treatments. 

Defendants have not had an opportunity to examine the most recent records, 

including those evaluating her present condition. Her condition is not yet permanent 

and stationary. At that time, the extent of plaintiff’s medical condition will be ready 

Case 5:06-cv-04682-JW Document 25 Filed 02/27/08 Page 2 of 3
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 

3 

STIPULATION TO REMAND ACTION TO STATE COURT; [PROPOSED] ORDER

220951.1 0170-15624 

LAW OFFICES

SHAW, TERHAR &

LAMONTAGNE, LLP

for evaluation by the parties to this litigation and the court. This court has complete 

discretion to order this remand and no statement of reasons is required. 

Dated: February , 2008 RICHARD E. DAMON, PC 

By: 

Richard E. Damon 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

GINA DRAKE 

Dated: February 19, 2008 SHAW, TERHAR & LaMONTAGNE, LLP 

By: /s/ John W. Shaw

John W. Shaw 

Attorneys for Defendant 

COSTCO WHOLESALE 

CORPORATION, HOMEDICSU.S.A., INC. (erroneously sued and 

served herein as “U.S.A.-

HoMEDICS, INC.”) and TAYLOR 

PRECISION PRODUCTS, INC. 

*** 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

 PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION between the parties, and good cause 

appearing therefore, the action captioned Drake v. Costco Wholesale Corporation et. 

al., Case No. C 06 04682 JW (N.D. Cal.) shall be remanded to the Superior Court of 

the State of California for the County of Santa Cruz for further proceedings. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February , 2008 

Hon. James Ware 

Judge, United States District Court 

*** ORDER ***

 

 The Court conducted a Preliminary Pretrial Conference on February 25, 2008. Counsel for 

Defendant was present; however, no one appeared on behalf of Plaintiff. 

 On August 1, 2006, this case was removed to this Court from Santa Cruz County Superior 

Court. (Docket Item No. 1.) The parties now request that this case be remanded back to state 

court, and they have filed a stipulation to that effect. (Docket Item No. 23.) 

 Title 28 U.S.C.§1447(c) provides, in relevant parts: A motion to remand the case on the basis 

of any defect other than lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be made within 30 days after the 

filing of the notice of removal under section 1446(a). If at any time before final judgment it 

appears that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction, the case shall be remanded. 

 The parties do not contend that the Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this case. 

Moreover, the parties have failed to make their request to remand on the basis of some other defect 

within the thirty days provided by statute. Rather, the parties seek remand based solely on their 

agreement that remand is in their best interests. The Court finds that the parties have not stated a 

basis under § 1447 upon which the Court may remand. Accordingly, the parties request to remand 

this case is DENIED. 

 In light of this Order, the parties shall appear for a Preliminary Pretrial Conference on March 

10, 2008 at 10 a.m. Failure to appear at this conference may result in sanctions and dismissal of 

the action for lack of prosecution pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

Dated: February 26, 2008 _____________________________________ 

 JAMES WARE 

 United States District Judge 

The parties shall file a Joint Preliminary Pretrial Statement by March 3, 2008.

Case 5:06-cv-04682-JW Document 25 Filed 02/27/08 Page 3 of 3