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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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...

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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: .... 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: ...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: ...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...