Excerpt: ...'s motion to stay this achon pending resolution of the following related cases: (1) Ramon Ponce, et al. v. Cortec Precision Sheet Metal, Inc., Santa Clara County Superior Court, Case No. 21CV378025 (the "Ponce Action"); and (2) Maria Sanchez v. Cortec Precision Sheet Metal, Inc., Santa Clara County Superior Court, Case No. 21CV380908 (the "Sanchez Action"). Based on the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS Cortec's motion. IV.BACKGROUND Plai...

Excerpt: ...nsult on the project. According to JLA, Mr. Rajagopalan breached the agreements governing his work, interfered with JLA's relationship with ASIP and Q Networks, and wrongfully claimed ownership of intellectual property developed in connection with the project. In a cross-complaint ("Amended Cross-complaint" or "ACC"), Mr. Rajagopalan (along with Bay Views and Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant Lianghwa Jou) alleges that he never signed t...

Excerpt: ...ert v. Samaritan, LLC (Super. Ct. Santa Clara County, No. 17CV314186) (Richert). Ms. Richert is represented by the same counsel who represent Plaintiff here. She alleges that, during pay periods when she received overtime wages, her wage statements failed to identify the accurate total hours worked as required by the Labor Code. Based on these allegations, she brings (1) a putative class claim for violation of Labor Code section 226 ("Section 226...

Excerpt: ...laintiff Joseph Ruiz. For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS Defendant's motion. VII. BACKGROUND A. Factual As alleged in the operative complaint, Defendant is a construction contractor who employed Plaintiff in May 2022 as a non-exempt employee with responsibilities for machine maintenance, mechanical repairs, drilling and handling hea\r,' machinery. (Complaint, 26.) Plaintiff alleges that Defendant failed to pay him and other non-exe...

Excerpt: ...Clara Superior Court Case No. 20CV366905) ("Dutcher"). Defendant now moves once again to decertify the class. In connection with the motion, Plaintiff moves to exclude the declaration of Yingyi Yang ("Yang Declaration") submitted by Google in support of its motion for decertification. Plaintiff opposes the motion to decertify and Google opposes the motion to exclude. For the reasons discussed below, the Court DENIED the motion to exclude and GRAN...

Excerpt: ...sure and authorization form to perform a background investigation. (Complaint, 22.) But the disclosure contained extraneous and superfluous language beyond the disclosure itself and/or was not clear and conspicuous, in violation of the FCRA. (ld., 23.) Specifically, extraneous information was reflected in "[m]iscellaneous provisions concerning Plaintiff's employment including, but not limited to, 'Time Clock Policy,' 'Uniform Policy,' 'Time Card ...

Excerpt: ...ants, all of whom are former Trace3 employees, joined Sycomp, a competitor, after abusing and exploiting their privileged access to Trace3's computer networks and devices to misappropriate Trace3's trade secret and confidential information to the benefit of Sycomp. Before the Court are three separate motions to seal, as well as a motion to uphold confidentiality designations by Trace3, all of which are opposed by Sycomp.2 For the reasons discusse...

Excerpt: ...692-1692p ("FDCPA"); and the California Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practces Act, California Civil Code sections 1788-1788.33 ("RFDCPA"). Before the Court is Ms. Guzman's motion to compel further document production responsive to requests for production of documents ("RPDs), Set Three, and CCS and CrossDefendants Patenaude & Felix and Todd Christopher Simonson's (collectively, "CrossDefendants") motion to seal certain limited records condition...

Excerpt: ... name "Findora." In Case No. 20CV372622 ("Ab-ttan"), 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, a former busi...

Excerpt: ... 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's fees, costs, and service award. The motion is unopposed. As discuss below, the court GRANTS final approval. I. LEGAL STANDARDS FOR SETTLEMENT APPROVAL A. Class Action Generally, "questions whether a [class action] settlement was fair and reasonable, whether notce to th...

Excerpt: ...yees for business expenses. Before the Court is Plaintiff's moton for approval of a settlement, which is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court is inclined to GRANT the motion, subject to changes to attorney's fees and the net settlement amount. VIII. BACKGROUND Plaintiff worked as a janitor for A1-Jay's from approximately 2015/2016 to September 15, 2021 and was classified as an hourly, non-exempt employee. (Complaint, '1 7.) He alleges that De...

Excerpt: ...UND As alleged in the operative complaint, Plaintiff is currently employed as a Data Center Technician by Defendant, which operates data center facilities and provides data center investment services. (Complaint, 7.) Plaintiff has been employed with Defendant since November 13, 2019, and throughout her employment has been employed as an hourly, nonexempt employee. (Ibid.) She alleges that Defendant violated Section 226, subdivision (a), by failin...

Excerpt: ...aritan, LLC (Super. Ct. Santa Clara County, No. 17CV314186) (Richert). Ms. Richert is represented by the same counsel who represent Plaintiff here. She alleges that, during pay periods when she received overtime wages, her wage statements failed to identify the accurate total hours worked as required by the Labor Cade. Based on these allegations, she brings (1) a putative class claim for violation of Labor Code section 226 ("Section 226") and (2)...

Excerpt: ...filed on February 7, 2022, the Court granted Defendants' special motion to strike the Complaint pursuant to Ctxle of Civil Procedure section 425.16 (the "anti-SLAPP statute" or "Section 425.15") and Plaintiff appealed. The Court's order was affirmed on appeal. Defendants now move for attorney fees and costs incurred on the appeal pursuant to the ant-SLAPP statute. The moton is unopposed. For the reasons discussed below, the court GRANTS the motio...

Excerpt: ...os' moton to compel further responses to various requests for production of documents on Mach49 and Next 15. As discussed below, the motion is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. l. BACKGROUND A. Factual According to the allegations of the operative First Amended Complaint ("FAC"), Mach49 is a startup company founded by Mr. Yotopoulos and defendants Linda Yates, Russell Lampert, and Brad Sharek (collectively referred to as the "Founder Defendants...

Excerpt: ...("TAC"). Dart opposes the motion. For the reasons discussed the Court DENIES Plaintiff's motion. l. BACKGROUND A. Factual According to the operative complaint, Dart is a Michigan corporation with principal place of business in Michigan, but does business in California. (Second Amended Class and Representative Acton Complaint ('SAC"), 7, 9.) When Plaintiff applied for employment with Defendant on 14, 2013, he was required to fill out a disclosure ...

Excerpt: ...er individual claims; (2) dismissing her class claims; and (3) staying the achon pending completion of the individual arbitration. Plaintiff nominally opposes the motion, insisting that is moot because she dismissed her class claims and added a representative PAGA claim after Wraplify filed the instant motion. BACKGROUND A. Factual Wraplify is a delivery service based in Milpitas that makes lual-only deliveries in California for its clients. Acco...

Excerpt: ...nt ("FAC"). BlackBerry opposes the motion in part. For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Sentinelone's motion. l. BACKGROUND BlackBerry is a security software and services company that provides enterprises and governments with the technology necessary to secure the Internet of Things (the applications for transferring date over networks of digital machines without human interaction), including A1 based cyber...

Excerpt: ...e joint status report filed June 30, 3023.) Plaintiff seeks an order directing to disclose the complete compensation and employment history of each employee in the relevant population, starting from the date of hire of each employee in the relevant population. Google opposes, contending Plaintiff's request covers too broad of a tme As discussed below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's request in part and DENIES it in part. l. BACKGROUND As set forth i...

Excerpt: ...compel further responses to various discovery. Plaintiff opposes AAP's motion and AAP opposes the motions to compel. For the reasons discussed below, the Court GRANTS AAP's motion and DENIES Plaintiffs motions. IV.BACKGROLJND According to the allegations of the Complaint, Mr. Phan was employed by AAP as an hourly-paid, non- exempt employee from September 2012 to approximately April 2015. He alleges that AAP failed to compensate him and class memb...

Excerpt: ...d that Defendants failed to provide employees with full, timely, uninterrupted meal periods and rest breaks; failed to pay employees for all hours worked; failed to pay overtime; failed to reimburse or fully reimburse employees for required expenses; and committed other wage and hour violations. The Complaint asserted causes of action for (1) failure to provide meal periods; (2) failure to authorize and permit rest periods; (3) failure to pay min...

Excerpt: ...of a PAGA settlement, filed May 8, 2023, forthe reasons set forth in the minute order filed June 2, 2023. As discussed below, the Court is inclined to grant Plaintiffs' Motion pending receipt and review of a corrected PAGA Notice. l. BACKGROUND According to the Complaint filed October 8, 2021, Plaintiffs Adriana Mendoza, Liliana Rios, Patricia Huerta, Veronica Martinez, and Diana Zapata (collectively, Named Plaintiffs) are former employees who wo...

Excerpt: ...the Court is Defendants' petition to com#l arbitration and stay Plaintiff's representative PAGA claim. As explained below, the Court GRANTS Defendants' petition. Plaintiff's individual PAGA claim must go to arbitration, and the representative PAGA claim will be stayed. . BACKGROUND As alleged in the operative complaint, Plaintiff worked for Defendants from June 2021 through approximately January 2022 as a non-exempt employee. (Complaint, 9.) Plai...

Excerpt: ...tion to enforce settlement and for attorney's fees, which is As discussed below, the Court is inclined to grant the motion but it requests a supplemental declaration from Plaintiff's counsel indicating the dates and amounts of the payments Defendant has made and an explanation of how Plaintiff determined the total remaining balance. Plaintiff should provide that declaration prior to the hearing on this matter if possible. BACKGROUND Plaintiff wor...

Excerpt: ...ations. Before the Court is Plaintiff's motion for final approval of the settlement, attorney fees award, cost award, and incentive payment. As discussed below, the Court is inclined to grant final approval but asks that Plaintiff lodge any individual settlement agreement she might have made with the court or affirm that she has entered into no such agreement. BACKGROUND Defendants employed Plaintiff in Santa Clara County as an hourly paid, non-e...