Excerpt: ...laint, defendant provides mechanical engineering services in Santa Clara County. (Complaint, ¶ 8.) Plaintiff began his employment with defendant on January 16, 2017. (Id. at ¶ 7.) He alleges that he and other employees received wage statements that failed to list the pay period start date and the correct name of their employer. (Id. at ¶ 22.) Plaintiff also alleges that he experienced race‐based discrimination and harassment during his emplo...

Excerpt: ... and logistics industries and maintains a facility in Santa Clara County. (Complaint, ¶ 8.) Plaintiff has worked for defendant for at least 10 years and is still employed there. (Id. at ¶ 7.) He alleges that he and other employees received wage statements that failed to list the address of the legal entity that employed them and the pay period start date. (Id. at ¶ 22.) Based on these allegations, plaintiff asserts claims for (1) violation of ...

Excerpt: ...corporation engaged in contracting work, including painting and plastering, headquartered in Santa Clara County. (Complaint, ¶ 8.) Plaintiff worked for defendant as a non‐exempt employee and received defective paystubs during his employment. (Id. at ¶ 7.) He alleges that he and other employees received wage statements that failed to identify the name and/or address of their employer. (Id. at ¶ 22.) Based on these allegations, plaintiff asser...

Excerpt: ... action pursuant to a forum selection clause. Plaintiff opposes these motions. The Innogy entities' motion to join in the motion by iTy, Cong, and Hess is GRANTED. I. Allegations of the Operative Complaint According to the First Amended and Supplemental Complaint (“FAC”), Rogers and his business partner Michael Mintz formed iTy in September of 2014 in San Francisco, with the plan to provide workforce management software to companies of all si...

Excerpt: ...rt is plaintiffs' motion for final approval of the settlement and for approval of their attorney fees, costs, and service awards. Plaintiffs' motion is unopposed. I. Legal Standards for Approving a Class Action/PAGA Settlement Generally, “questions whether a settlement was fair and reasonable, whether notice to the class was adequate, whether certification of the class was proper, and whether the attorney fee award was proper are matters addres...

Excerpt: ...emary Schooler, Steve J. Sordello, Michael A. Stankey, Robert Bearden, Paul Cormier, Peter Fenton, and Kevin Klausmeyer (collectively, the “Cloudera Defendants”) to stay all proceedings in this action pending the resolution of the pleadings in a related federal action. Alternatively, the Cloudera Defendants move to stay discovery until the pleadings are resolved in both this case and the federal action. Plaintiffs oppose the entry of a stay. ...

Excerpt: ... in August 2015. (SAC, ¶ 7.) He was employed by defendants until August 2017. (Ibid.) Plaintiff alleges that he and other employees received wage statements that failed “to identify the correct rates of pay and number of hours worked for incentive overtime wages, … including but not limited to Reg Comm OT and Spiffs OT wage payments.” (Id. at ¶ 16.) Based on these allegations, plaintiff asserts a single claim under PAGA. He dismissed the ...

Excerpt: ... Background As alleged in the FAC, Prager is a non‐profit, 501(c)(3) tax exempt, educational organization that promotes discussion on historical, religious, and current events by disseminating educational videos intended for younger, student‐based audiences between the ages of 13 and 35. (FAC, ¶ 10.) The videos depict scholars, sources, and other prominent speakers who often espouse viewpoints in the mainstream of conservative thought. (Ibid...

Excerpt: ...iled to pay all wages due to employees due to illegal time rounding; failed to pay overtime for all overtime hours worked; failed to pay 7th‐day overtime; violated Labor Code section 552's prohibition on over six consecutive working days per week; failed to provide meal and rest periods; derivatively and independently failed to provide accurate wage statements; and are derivatively liable for penalties pursuant to Labor Code section 203, the Pr...

Excerpt: ...es and costs. I. Factual and Procedural Background As alleged in the operative complaint in the lead action (the First Amended Complaint or “FAC”), defendant Island Hospitality Management, Inc. provided hotel management services to hotels throughout California until December of 2014, when it converted to Island Hospitality Management, LLC. (FAC, ¶¶ 7‐8.) Among the hotels to which defendants have provided services is the Residence Inn by M...

Excerpt: ...aintiff Fernanda Rocha Hawkins's motion for final approval of the settlement and for approval of her attorney fees, costs, and service award. Plaintiff's motion is unopposed. I. Legal Standards for Approving a Class Action Settlement Generally, “questions whether a settlement was fair and reasonable, whether notice to the class was adequate, whether certification of the class was proper, and whether the attorney fee award was proper are matters...

Excerpt: ...endants have not joined their motion and indicate that they will oppose plaintiffs' attorney fee request at the appropriate time. I. Factual and Procedural Background Headquartered in Sunnyvale, California, AFOP was a Delaware corporation that produced fiber optic components and integrated modules for communications equipment. (First Amended Complaint in Bushansky, Case No. 16‐CV‐294245 (“FAC”), ¶¶ 2, 11.) On April 7, 2016, the company ...

Excerpt: ...as paid on an hourly basis as a non‐exempt employee. (Ibid.) Plaintiff alleges that Inter‐Con failed to pay security guards/officers on a weekly basis as required of “temporary services employers” by Labor Code section 201.3. (Id. at ¶ 16.) Based on these allegations, he asserts a single cause of action under PAGA. II. Requests for Judicial Notice Defendant's request for judicial notice of legislative history materials related to section...

Excerpt: .... All three motions are opposed. I. Allegations of the Operative Complaint From March 3, 2015 to May 19, 2017, plaintiff worked for defendant as a security guard/officer. (Second Amended Complaint, ¶ 6.) During his employment, plaintiff was paid on an hourly basis as a non‐exempt employee. (Ibid.) Plaintiff alleges that Inter‐Con failed to pay security guards/officers on a weekly basis as required by Labor Code section 201.3. (Id. at ¶ 16.)...

Excerpt: ...round According to the operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), the “Defendant LLCs” owned, operated, and managed at least 11 massage establishments and hired massage therapists as full‐time, non‐exempt employees. (FAC, ¶¶ 5, 29.) Six of the Defendant LLCs remain active. (FAC, ¶ 6.) Individual defendants Chiu Hung Lam and Wah Yiu Lee created the Defendant LLCs for purposes of evading individual liabilities and they are the member...

Excerpt: ...egations of the Operative Complaint Defendant Merchants & Medical Credit Corporation, Inc. (“MMCC”) is a Michigan corporation engaged in the business of collecting defaulted consumer debts in California. (Complaint, ¶ 11.) Defendants Cairnduff and Hresko are Michigan residents who plaintiff alleges are employees, agents, officers, and/or directors of MMCC and are themselves “thirdparty debt collectors” under the RFDCPA. (Id. at ¶¶ 12�...

Excerpt: ...ly reflect their pay period start dates. (Id. at ¶ 23.) Plaintiff also suffered an on‐the‐job injury on February 2, 2016. (Id. at ¶ 39.) He alleges that defendant terminated him without making any attempt to accommodate his resulting disability. (Id. at ¶¶ 39‐44.) On December 21, 2016, plaintiff filed this action, asserting class claims for (1) violation of Labor Code section 226 and (2) penalties under the Private Attorneys General Act...

Excerpt: ...Plaintiff began working for defendant as an hourly employee on September 16, 2015, but was not provided with accurate itemized wage statements. (Id. at ¶ 8.) For example, wages identified as “Shift Reg 10” were paid at the rate of $17.32 per hour and overtime hours identified as “Shift O/T 3” were paid at $25.99 per hour, but wage statements reflected that both types of wages were paid at $15.75 per hour. (Ibid.) Plaintiff alleges that o...

Excerpt: ...proval of his attorney fees, costs, and enhancement award. Plaintiff's motion is unopposed. I. Legal Standard for Approving a Class Action Settlement Generally, “questions whether a settlement was fair and reasonable, whether notice to the class was adequate, whether certification of the class was proper, and whether the attorney fee award was proper are matters addressed to the trial court's broad discretion.” (Wershba v. Apple Computer, Inc...

Excerpt: ... Background According to the operative Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”), defendant advertised its Apple TV 2.0 and 3.0 products as having “HD” or high definition capabilities, when in fact the devices' performance did not meet the industry‐accepted definition of HD, developed by the Advanced Television Systems Committee (“ATSC”). Specifically, Apple did not disclose that Apple TV 2.0 “only supported the H.264 codec with a Main Pro...

Excerpt: ...p Subscriptions with Apple, and Apple both delivers and charges subscribers for associated content. (TAC, ¶ 21.) However, Apple does so without complying with various provisions of Business & Professions Code sections 17600‐ 17604, which govern automatic renewal and continuous service offers to consumers in California (the “Automatic Renewal Law” or “ARL”). In order to make purchases from Apple's online store, consumers are first requi...

Excerpt: ...that order. Plaintiffs now move for final approval of the settlement and approval of their attorney fees, costs, and enhancement awards. Their motion is unopposed. I. Legal Standard for Approving a Derivative Settlement “A court reviewing a settlement agreement considers whether the proposed settlement is fair and reasonable in light of all relevant factors. [Citations.] A court reviews the settlement of a derivative suit as a means of protecti...

Excerpt: ...es paramedical examination services in the State of California, and A.P.P.S. of California is a related entity. (Class Action Complaint, ¶¶ 9‐10.) In October 2015, defendants hired plaintiff as a Medical Examiner to conduct medical exams for life insurance applications. (Id. at ¶ 7.) Plaintiff was classified as an independent contractor and compensated on a piece‐rate basis for her work. (Ibid.) She alleges that she and other members of th...

Excerpt: ...l his termination on August 7, 2017, and was a Senior Software Engineer at its Mountain View campus. (First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), ¶ 12.) Plaintiff David Gudeman was also a Software Engineer at Google from 2013 until his termination in December 2016. (Id. at ¶ 13.) Plaintiff Manuel Amador worked for Google in San Francisco beginning in 2013, then transferred to its Zurich, Switzerland offices. (Id. at ¶ 14.) He unsuccessfully reapplied...

Excerpt: ...ust 15, 2016 to February 20, 2017. (Id. at ¶ 4.) He alleges that his wage statements failed to specify the hourly rates and number of hours worked for the “Premium Pay‐Hourly,” which was listed as a lump sum. (Id. at ¶ 17.) Plaintiff filed this action on May 11, 2017, asserting claims for (1) violation of Labor Code section 226 and (2) penalties under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”). The parties have reached a settlement. P...