Excerpt: ...ns committed against herself and other aggrieved “non-White employees.” In an order filed on August 22, 2022 (“August 2022 Order”), the Court sustained Defendants' demurrer to the PAGA claim with leave to amend. Plaintiff filed the operative Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) on September 20, 2022. Now before the Court is Defendants' renewed demurrer to or, in the alternative, motion to strike the PAGA claim. Plaintiff opposes Defendant...

Excerpt: ...tlement 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. Plaintiffs' motion is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS final approval. I. LEGAL STANDARD FOR SETTLEMENT APPROVAL Generally, “questions whether a [class action] settlement was fair and reasonable, whether notice to the class was adequate, whether ...

Excerpt: ...or deny the allegations of her operative Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) and (2) each of its affirmative defenses “does not plead how or why facts constitute a defense to a material allegation in the [SAC].” Plaintiff seeks an order striking the entire FAA and each of its affirmative defenses, and entering a judgment making certain findings and awarding relief to Plaintiff and other aggrieved employees. Defendants oppose Plaintiff's moti...

Excerpt: ....S.C. sections 1692‐1692p (“FDCPA”); and the California Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, California Civil Code sections 1788‐1788.33 (“RFDCPA”). Currently before the court is Guzman's motion to compel further responses to her special interrogatories (“SIs”), set three and requests for production of documents (“RPDs”), set three. Guzman seeks information relating to CCS's net worth for the purposes of pursuing her ...

Excerpt: ...d. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS preliminary approval, subject to a few modifications to the class notice. I. BACKGROUND Defendant employed Plaintiff in Santa Clara County on an hourly basis from March 7, 2016 to May 19, 2017. (Second Amended Class Action Complaint for Damages (“SAC”), ¶ 18.) Plaintiff alleges that he and other employees worked off‐the‐clock, including by donning and doffing personal protective equipment (“PPE�...

Excerpt: ... which the Court preliminarily approved in an order filed on September 1, 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. Plaintiff's motion is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS final approval...

Excerpt: ...aintiff's motion, subject to its receipt and review of: (1) additional information about the merits and potential value of certain theories, (2) Plaintiff's counsel's disclosure of their fee‐splitting arrangement, (3) a declaration by the named plaintiff addressing his view of the settlement and efforts on the case, and (4) an explanatory notice or letter to be included with the payments to aggrieved employees. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the o...

Excerpt: ...rmerly “Innogy SE”).2 Before the Court are (1) Innogy SE's motion to dismiss the claims against it for lack of service, and Plaintiff's motions (2) to compel further responses to his first set of special interrogatories to FEV and (3) for evidence and issue sanctions against FEV due to its asserted violation of the Court's August 11, 2020 and December 27, 2021 discovery orders. All of these motions are opposed, and FEV seeks monetary sanction...

Excerpt: ...w modifications to the class notice and notice procedure. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the Complaint, Plaintiff began working for Defendant in October 2018 and was employed as a non‐exempt IT Analyst. (Complaint, ¶ 8.) Throughout his employment, Plaintiff received wage statements that showed “86.67” hours, regardless of how many hours he actually worked. (Ibid.) The wage statements also showed gross wages earned, without any hourly rates or...

Excerpt: ...ed in an order filed on August 15, 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 her attorney fees, costs, and service award. Plaintiff's motion is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS final approval. I. LEGAL STANDARDS FOR SETTLEMENT APP...

Excerpt: ...parties reached a settlement, which the Court preliminarily approved in an order filed on June 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 Plaintiff's motion for final approval of the settlement and for approval of her attorney fees, costs, and service award. Plaintiff's motion is unopposed. As discussed below, the Co...

Excerpt: ...��CSC”) to form Defendant DXC Technology Company (“DXC”) (the “Merger”). In an order filed on August 8, 2022 (“August Order”), the Court sustained a demurrer by HPE, DXC, and the individual Defendants to each claim in the First Amended Consolidated Complaint (“FAC”). Plaintiffs filed the operative Second Amended Consolidated Complaint (“SAC”) on September 21, 2022. Defendants again demur for failure to state a cause of actio...

Excerpt: ...n September 12, 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 her attorney fees, costs, and service award. Plaintiff's motion is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS final approval. I. LEGAL STANDARDS FOR SETTLEMENT APPROVAL A. Class Acti...

Excerpt: ...ed in an order filed on October 3, 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 her attorney fees, costs, and service award. Plaintiff's motion is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS final approval. I. LEGAL STANDARDS FOR SETTLEMENT APP...

Excerpt: ... committed other wage and hour violations. The parties reached a settlement, which the Court preliminarily approved in an order filed on August 29, 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. Plaintiff'...

Excerpt: ...respects. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion as to the proposed meal period and electronic wage statement classes, and otherwise DENIES the motion. I. BACKGROUND According to the complaint, Plaintiff worked for Defendant as a non‐exempt, hourly employee from January 17, 2000 through February 28, 2018. (Complaint, ¶ 19.) Plaintiff and other putative class members were frequently not provided with compliant meal and rest per...

Excerpt: ...ement, which the Court preliminarily approved in an order filed on September 6, 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 are Plaintiff's motions (1) for final approval of the settlement and (2) for approval of his attorney fees, costs, and service award. Plaintiff's motions are unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRA...

Excerpt: ...letion of her deposition and answer certain questions, and for a protective order addressing the logistics of the remote deposition as well as conduct by Goodwill's attorney Gregory Simonian and Ms. Sosa's attorney Frank Perretta. Plaintiff also seeks monetary sanctions against Goodwill, its counsel, and Mr. Perretta. Goodwill and, separately, Ms. Sosa oppose Plaintiff's motion. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion with certain...

Excerpt: ...Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (2022) ___U.S.___ [142 S. Ct. 1906, 2022 U.S. LEXIS 2940] (Viking River). Plaintiff opposes the motion on several grounds. As discussed below, the Court DENIES Defendants' motion. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the complaint, Defendant Western Digital Technologies, Inc. is a Delaware corporation that does business in California, including in Santa Clara County. (Complaint, ¶ 9.) Western Digital is engaged in th...

Excerpt: ... U.S.C. sections 1692–1692p (“FDCPA”); and the California Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, California Civil Code sections 1788–1788.33 (“RFDCPA”). Before the Court is Ms. Guzman's motion for class certification, which CrossDefendants oppose. As discussed below, the Court DENIES the motion for class certification without prejudice. Also at issue is a motion to seal certain materials filed in support of CrossDefendants' opp...

Excerpt: ...o certain provisions of the Labor Code from the FAC. Plaintiffs oppose Cepheid's motion in all respects. As discussed below, the Court OVERRULES Cepheid's demurrer and GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART its motion to strike. I. BACKGROUND According to the FAC, Defendant manufactures medical equipment in California. (FAC, ¶ 7.) In November 2021, Plaintiff Kamlesh Krishna began working for Defendant as an order picker in the logistics department at...

Excerpt: ...de sections 1788–1788.33 (“RFDCPA”). Before the Court is Galaxy's motion to compel arbitration of the cross‐claims and stay the case, which Plaintiff opposes. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS Galaxy's motion. I. BACKGROUND Galaxy filed this action on November 18, 2021, asserting claim for breach of contract and account stated arising from Ms. Oda's alleged failure to fully repay a loan subsequently assigned to Galaxy. Ms. Oda answered...

Excerpt: ...) failed to pay all final wages owed as a result of fees incurred with the use of pay cards; and (f) failed to provide accurate wage statements. Before the Court is Defendant's motion to compel arbitration, based on the United States Supreme Court's recent decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (2022) ___U.S.___ [142 S. Ct. 1906, 2022 U.S. LEXIS 2940] (Viking River). Plaintiff opposes the motion on several grounds. As discussed below, ...

Excerpt: ...ctively, “Plaintiffs”) obtained fee simple title to certain real property and improvements located at 27223 Sherlock Road in Los Altos, California (“27223 Sherlock”). (Complaint at ¶ 4.) Defendant Joan E. Sherlock (“Sherlock”) is the owner of real property located at 27261 Sherlock Road in Los Altos (“27261 Sherlock”). (Id. at ¶ 5.) The two properties are adjacent to one another. (Id. at ¶ 10.) In 2016, Plaintiffs hired TKM Lan...

Excerpt: ...hat order. Before the Court are (1) the parties' joint motion for final approval of the settlement and (2) Plaintiff's motion for approval of her attorney fees, costs, and service award. The motions are unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS final approval. I. LEGAL STANDARD FOR SETTLEMENT APPROVAL Generally, “questions whether a [class action] settlement was fair and reasonable, whether notice to the class was adequate, whether certif...