Excerpt: ...mended Complaint and portions of its Cross‐Complaint. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS Cypress's motion. I. LEGAL STANDARD “The court may order that a record be filed under seal only if it expressly finds facts that establish: (1) There exists an overriding interest that overcomes the right of public access to the record; (2) The overriding interest supports sealing the record; (3) A substantial probability exists that the overriding inte...

Excerpt: ...narily approved in an order filed on March 21, 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 Plaintiffs' motion for final approval of the settlement and for approval of their attorney fees, costs, and service award. The motion is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS final approval. I. LEGAL STANDARDS FOR SETTLEME...

Excerpt: ...Alternatively, it moves to strike allegations concerning remedies it contends are unavailable and allegations it contends are argumentative, irrelevant, inflammatory, or otherwise improper. As discussed below, the Court SUSTAINS Defendant's demurrer with leave to amend based on CDA immunity. The alternative motion to strike is MOOT. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the Complaint, Lady Freethinker is a registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization founde...

Excerpt: ...“DXC”) (the “Merger”). Before the Court is a demurrer by HPE, DXC, and the individual defendants on the ground that each cause of action in the operative First Amended Consolidated Complaint (“FAC”) fails to state a claim by pleading a material misstatement or omission. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).) Plaintiffs oppose the demurrer. As discussed below, the Court SUSTAINS the demurrer with 30 days' leave to amend. I. BACKGROUN...

Excerpt: ...ew modifications to the class notice. I. BACKGROUND According to the operative complaint, Defendant employed Plaintiff as an hourly‐paid nonexempt employee from 2016 to 2020 in Santa Clara County. (First Amended Class Action Complaint for Damages (“FAC”), ¶ 18.) Defendant failed to provide Plaintiff and other employees with compliant meal and rest periods or to pay required premiums. (Id., ¶¶ 26–28.) It failed to pay minimum and overti...

Excerpt: ...s resulting from the COVID‐19 pandemic. In an order filed on March 1, 2022, the Court sustained Factory Mutual's demurrer to the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) with leave to amend (“March Order”).2 The Hockey Plaintiffs filed the operative Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) on March 30, 2022. Now, Factory Mutual demurs to and moves to strike portions of the SAC. The Hockey Plaintiffs oppose both motions. As discussed below, the Court...

Excerpt: ...elationship with ASIP Holdings and Q Networks, and wrongly claimed ownership of intellectual property developed in connection with the project. In a cross‐complaint, Mr. Rajagopalan alleges that he never signed the draft consulting agreement and was not paid for much of his work. Moreover, he disclosed his other work for Q Networks—on his own time—on technology outside the scope of the JLA project to CrossComplainant and ‐Defendant John T...

Excerpt: ...he motions in part and DENIES them in part. I. DISCUSSION Plaintiff moves to compel each defendant's further responses to Special Interrogatory No. 6 and Requests for Production Nos. 1–3, 8, and 12, as well as their initial responses to Form Interrogatory No. 17.1.1 Defendants oppose the motions on both procedural and substantive grounds. A. Procedural Issues Defendants oppose the motions on the grounds that Plaintiff should have filed a total ...

Excerpt: ...intiff's motion for preliminary approval of a settlement, which is unopposed. The Court issued a tentative ruling on April 22, 2022, stating that it required more information to evaluate the settlement and directing the parties to meet and confer about whether they could amend the release to conform with Amaro v. Anaheim Arena Management, LLC (2021) 69 Cal.App.5th 521 (Amaro). The matter came on for hearing on April 28, 2022 and was submitted to ...

Excerpt: ...tigation. The parties reached a settlement, which the Court preliminarily approved in an order filed on May 4, 2022. The factual and procedural background of the action and the Court's analysis of the settlement are set forth in that order. Now before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for final approval of the settlement and for approval of its attorney fees, expenses, and incentive award. The motion is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRAN...

Excerpt: ...LLC (2021) 69 Cal.App.5th 521 (Amaro) and to address other issues noted below. However, the Court is inclined to reduce the attorney fee award to 1/3 of the common fund. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as an hourly, non‐exempt employee in San Jose. (Complaint, ¶ 3.) She alleges that Alpha Staffing, LLC and Caliva were her joint employers, while NC3 Systems was also listed as the employer on documentation issued to her and ot...

Excerpt: ...s, gifted the property of 2960 Sierra Road, San Jose, California 95132 (the “Property”) to Tyler and his wife, Leticia Kawamoto (“Leticia”). (FAC, ¶ 10.)3 On or about April 30, 2007, Tyler and Leticia paid his parents $350,438.87 for the Property. (FAC, ¶ 11.) Tyler and Leticia continued to make mortgage payments of $1,500 per month on the Property. (FAC, ¶ 12.) On or about June 6, 2008, Tyler's father passed away due to natural causes...

Excerpt: ...ive FACC, Amit Gupta (“Gupta”) founded the company now known as Opensense, which focuses on corporate email tools, such as email signature management, tracking and analytics, in 2013. (FACC, ¶ 6.) Gupta first met Perone, a wealthy investor with extensive high‐tech business experience, in November 2017. (Id., ¶¶ 9‐10.) After utilizing Opensense's products in his venture capital company, 345 Partners LLC, Perone emailed Gupta staying tha...

Excerpt: ...low, the Court is inclined to grant Plaintiff's motion, but requires more information to evaluate counsel's fee request. I. BACKGROUND According to the operative complaint, Defendant employed Plaintiff and others as nonexempt employees in California during the relevant time period. (Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”), ¶¶ 17–19.) Plaintiff alleges that Defendant failed to include non‐discretionary bonuses, commissions, and other incentive ...

Excerpt: ... approval, subject to the parties' agreement to amend the release to conform with Amaro v. Anaheim Arena Management, LLC (2021) 69 Cal.App.5th 521 (Amaro). I. BACKGROUND According to the operative complaint, Defendants employed Plaintiff in Santa Clara County as an hourly‐paid employee from March 2014 to March 2020. (First Amended Class Action Complaint for Damages (“FAC”), ¶ 18.) Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff and other employees ...

Excerpt: .... Plaintiff Cristina Gonzalez opposes both motions. As discussed below, the Court largely DENIES Defendants' motion to strike, and SUSTAINS Ms. Nguyen's demurrer. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the operative complaint, Plaintiff worked as a mercantile clerk at the gas station known as Gilroy Gas from July 20, 2005 to January 14, 2020. (FAC, ¶ 2.) Each pay period, Defendant Luong Pham gave Plaintiff a carbon copy of a handwritten pay record that did...

Excerpt: ...und of the action and the Court's analysis of the settlement and settlement class are set forth in that order. Before the Court are Plaintiffs' motions (1) for final approval of the settlement and (2) for approval of their attorney fees, costs, and service awards. The motions are unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS both motions, but with a reduced attorney fee award. I. LEGAL STANDARD Generally, “questions whether a [class action] s...

Excerpt: ...r wage and hour violations. The parties reached a settlement, which the Court preliminarily approved in an order filed on March 14, 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 Plaintiffs' motion for final approval of the settlement and for approval of their attorney fees, costs, and service award. The motion is unopposed....

Excerpt: ...reservation, which seeks “a Judicial Order preserving any & all Electronically Stored Informational (ESI) evidence relevant to all Dfts' algorithms & malgorithms involving Covid‐19”; “all ESI, as related to any & all persons described in my Complaint as ‘The Disinformation Dozen' ”; and “Judicial Suspension of all Dfts' routine document retention/destruction policy,& to put in place a ‘litigation hold', so as to preserve such rele...

Excerpt: ...“FDCPA”). In an order filed on February 7, 2022, the Court granted Defendants' special motion to strike the Complaint pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 (the “anti‐SLAPP statute”). Plaintiff appealed, and her appeal is pending. Defendants now move for attorney fees and costs under the anti‐SLAPP statute. Plaintiff opposes their motion,1 urging that the more specific attorney fee provision in the FDCPA controls, and Def...

Excerpt: ...oes 10 to 50 (collectively, “Defendants”) to recover for unpaid wages and compensation for meal and rest period premiums. (3AC, ¶ 5.) Under California Rule of Court 3.400(b), the court must consider whether the action is likely to involve: (1) Numerous pretrial motions raising difficult or novel legal issues that will be time‐ consuming to resolve; (2) Management of a large number of witnesses or a substantial amount of documentary evidenc...

Excerpt: ...Court is Plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of a settlement. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS preliminary approval. I. BACKGROUND According to the Complaint, Plaintiff worked for Defendant in Santa Clara County as an hourly, non‐exempt employee from August 2016 to August 2020. (Complaint, ¶ 7.) He alleges that, before 2018, Defendant used a time rounding system that undercompensated employees, and also required employees to work o...

Excerpt: ...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 STANDARDS FOR SETTLEMENT APPROVAL A. Class Action Generally, “questions whether a [class action] settlement wa...

Excerpt: ...tlement. Even after issuing a tentative ruling directly to the parties and receiving a supplemental declaration,1 the Court still has questions about the settlement's structure, and therefore asks the parties to appear at the June 9 hearing. I. BACKGROUND According to the complaint, Defendants are in the industry of semiconductor and infrastructure software solutions. (Complaint, ¶ 2.) Plaintiff worked for Defendants during the relevant time per...

Excerpt: ...sclosures in connection with background checks; and committed other wage and hour violations. Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of a settlement. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS preliminary approval, now that the parties have agreed to amend the release to conform with Amaro v. Anaheim Arena Management, LLC (2021) 69 Cal.App.5th 521 (Amaro). I. BACKGROUND According to the complaint, Defendant is a Delaware corpor...