Excerpt: ...claims, which is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS preliminary approval of the revised settlement filed on September 6, 2022. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff was employed by Defendants in California as a non‐ exempt hourly employee during the relevant time period. (First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), ¶ 2.) She alleges that Defendants have intentionally rounded down employees' hours to avoid paying overtime, paid employees less than thei...

Excerpt: ...t. (Cottini v. Enloe Med. Ctr. (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 401, 421.) Those conditions are: (a) The court has taken into account the extent to which the opposing party has relied on the list of expert witnesses. (b) The court has determined that any party opposing the motion will not be prejudiced in maintaining that party's action or defense on the merits. (c) The court has determined either of the following: (1) The moving party would not in the exe...

Excerpt: ...le shifts, failed to reimburse them for business expenses, and committed other wage and hour violations. The parties reached a settlement, which the Court preliminarily approved in an order filed on June 3, 2022.1 The factual and procedural background of the action and the Court's analysis of the settlement and settlement class are set forth in that order. Before the Court is Plaintiffs' motion for final approval of the settlement and for approva...

Excerpt: ...ussed below, the Court is inclined to grant Plaintiff's motion, but will require him to provide a declaration addressing his experience working for Defendant, his view of the settlement, and his efforts on the case. In addition, Plaintiff must submit an explanatory cover letter to be mailed to aggrieved employees for the Court's review. I. BACKGROUND Defendant operates large apartment complexes in Northern California. (Complaint, ¶ 9.) Plaintiff...

Excerpt: ...ered services to be rendered for 18 months and specified both the rate the workers were to be paid and the rate that was to be charged to Advoque. (Ibid.) At the time the Advoque Contract was executed, defendant Advoque Safeguard, LLC (“Advoque Safeguard”) did not exist. (Id. at ¶ 10.) From approximately June 2020 through early January 2021, Plaintiff issued invoices to Advoque for staffing services provided by Plaintiff and received payment...

Excerpt: ... names Veeco as a nominal defendant. In an order filed on January 25, 2021 (“January 2021 Order”), the Court sustained Defendants' demurrer to the amended complaint without leave to amend based on Plaintiff's failure to plead demand futility.3 Plaintiff appealed that decision. While the appeal was pending, the parties negotiated a settlement. Now before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of the settlement, which is unopp...

Excerpt: ...he assignment to GSC a Food and Beverage Concession Agreement between the City of San Jose (“City”) and Areas USA SJC, LLC (“Areas”), dated January 29, 2009 (“Prime contract”). (Id.) Areas assigned its interest in the Prime contract to GSC pursuant to the Fourth Amendment to Food and Beverage Concession Agreement between City and Areas, dated October 25, 2013. (Id.) Pursuant to the assignment of the Prime contract by Areas to GSC, GSC...

Excerpt: ...ourt preliminarily approved in an order filed on December 7, 2021. The factual and procedural background of the action and the Court's analysis of the settlement and settlement class are set forth in that order. Before the Court is Plaintiffs' motion for final approval of the settlement and for approval of their attorney fees, costs, and service awards. The motion is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS final approval. I. LEGAL STANDAR...

Excerpt: ...iscrimination and retaliation; (4) failing to ensure an independent Chairman; (5) retaining PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as the Company's auditor; and (6) making related false and misleading statements in public filings. Now before the Court is Defendants' demurrer to the complaint on various grounds, as well as their alternative motion to dismiss based on a Delaware forum selection bylaw adopted by stockholders shortly after this action was filed....

Excerpt: ...intiff's motion. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), Defendant is a Silicon Valley‐ based company whose products combine traditional Robotic Process Automation (“RPA”) with cognitive elements such as natural language processing and reading unstructured data. (FAC, ¶ 7.) Although it markets itself as a start‐up company, Defendant has existed since 2010 and its customers have included Google, Link...

Excerpt: ...s motion for preliminary approval of a settlement of the class and PAGA claims, which is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS preliminary approval of the amended settlement filed on August 26, 2022. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff worked for Defendant in California as an hourly employee from approximately 2019 to July 24, 2021. (First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) ¶ 6.) He alleges that Defendant failed to include nondiscretionary bonuses and/...

Excerpt: ...ntiff's motion for preliminary approval of a settlement of the class and PAGA claims, which is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS preliminary approval to the settlement as modified by the Amendment filed on August 22, 2022. I. BACKGROUND Defendant is an Illinois corporation with employees in California and throughout this county. (First Amended Class Action Complaint (“FAC”), ¶ 6.) It is a leading home furnishings specialty reta...

Excerpt: ...ichard Trevino for battery and negligence. Now before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of a settlement of the class and PAGA claims, which is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court is inclined to grant preliminary approval, subject to the parties' agreement to amend the release to remove the waiver of Civil Code section 1542 by class members and the State of California. I. BACKGROUND A. Factual SJCC operates a country cl...

Excerpt: ...partners like third‐party Home Box Office Inc. (“HBO”) and its associated tracking of user's activities online. Before the Court are the following motions: (1) Facebook's motion to stay this action in favor of a related action by Ms. McDaniel against HBO; (2) Plaintiffs' motion to sever the claims of Mr. Rickwalder and Ms. Carter in the event the Court grants a stay; and (3) Facebook's demurrer to Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint (“SA...

Excerpt: ...nd failed to reimburse employees for business expenses associated with their use of personal cell phones to help customers. Before the Court is Walmart's motion to stay the action in favor of (1) a related class action by the same plaintiffs, Salvador Guzman, et al. v. Walmart Inc., et al. (N.D.Cal, No. 21‐ CV‐09133‐NC) (the “Federal Guzman Action”), as well as (2) three PAGA cases by different plaintiffs that assert overlapping claims,...

Excerpt: ...d committed other wage and hour violations. Now before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of a settlement, which is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS preliminary approval. I. BACKGROUND Solaray, LLC is a wholesale retailer of eyewear, accessories, gifts, apparel, and other merchandise and sells merchandise in California, across the United States, and in Canada. (Complaint, ¶ 6.) Plaintiff was employed by Solar...

Excerpt: ...ircuit Opinion”). In an order filed on April 18, 2022 (“April Order”), the Court denied Plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint and Walmart's motion for judgment on the pleadings. The factual and procedural background to the action is summarized in more detail in the April Order and is not repeated here.11 Now before the Court is another motion by Plaintiff for leave to file an amended complaint, this time in order to add ...

Excerpt: ...ay 4, 2022. The factual and procedural background of the action and the Court's analysis of the settlement and settlement class are set forth in that order. Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for final approval of the settlement and for approval of his attorney fees, costs, and service award. The motion is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS final approval. I. LEGAL STANDARDS FOR SETTLEMENT APPROVAL A. Class Action Generally, “q...

Excerpt: ...ision in a related federal case, Epic Games Inc. v. Apple Inc. (N.D. Cal., No. 4:20‐ CV‐05640) (“Epic”), Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Class Action Complaint (“FAC”).1 Apple demurred, and in an order filed on February 4, 2022 (“February Order”), the Court sustained its demurrer with leave to amend. The Court held that Plaintiffs failed to state a claim under the Cartwright Act because, under the Colgate doctrine, the conduct th...

Excerpt: ...dora.” In Case No. 20CV372622 (“Abittan”), Temujin alleges that Defendants and CrossComplainants Ariel Abittan, Benjamin Fisch, and Charles Lu conspired to (a) assert a false claim of ownership of its business, (b) misappropriate its trade secrets, (c) usurp and interfere with control over its assets, such as social media accounts, and (d) interfere with its relationships with investors and business partners. Mr. Abittan and, separately, Mr...

Excerpt: ...��) propounded to Plaintiff. BACKGROUND Plaintiff worked for GSV from March to June 2017. He notified GSV upon his hiring that he suffered from disabilities, including seizures and vascular artery disease, which required he be assigned a seated position. In his initial job assignment in the Kitting and Packaging department, Plaintiff was able to sit down for much of his scheduled shift and move around when necessary. In June 2017, Plaintiff's man...

Excerpt: ...he Court DENIES Defendants' motion. I. BACKGROUND3 MMCC is a Michigan corporation engaged in the business of collecting defaulted consumer debts in California. (First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), ¶ 11.) Mr. Hresko, Mr. Brewer, and Ms. Church are Michigan residents who Plaintiff alleges are employees, agents, and, in Mr. Hresko's case, an officer and/or director of MMCC and are also “third‐party debt collectors” under the Rosenthal Act. (...

Excerpt: ...ed against herself and other aggrieved “non‐White employees.” Before the Court is Defendants' demurrer to the PAGA claim and alternative motion to strike that claim. Again in the alternative, Defendants move to bifurcate Plaintiff's PAGA claim. Plaintiff opposes Defendants' motion in all respects. As discussed below, the Court SUSTAINS Defendants' demurrer with 30 days' leave to amend. The alternative motion to strike and motion to bifurcat...

Excerpt: ...l of these motions are opposed. As discussed below, the Court DENIES MCM's motion for summary judgment and GRANTS Plaintiff's motion for class certification. Since neither of these rulings relies on Ms. Fisher's declarations, MCM's motion to strike is MOOT. I. BACKGROUND A. Factual According to the complaint, Plaintiff is alleged to have incurred debt associated with a consumer credit account issued by Capital One Bank (USA), N.A. (First Amended ...

Excerpt: ...ich is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court requires more information to evaluate the settlement. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff alleges that Defendant failed to provide her and other non‐exempt employees with required meal and rest periods. (First Amended Class Action Complaint (“FAC”), ¶¶ 34– 37, 46.) Defendant also failed to pay required minimum and overtime wages and to timely pay all wages owed during employment and at discharge or re...