Excerpt: ...ng DHIM in a timely PAGA notice (and otherwise complying with PAGA's exhaustion requirements), and (2) his claims against DHIM are accordingly barred by the statute of limitations. Plaintiff opposes DHIM's motion. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS summary judgment. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND4 As alleged in the operative complaint, Plaintiff was hired by Defendants in July of 2015 as an hourly, non‐ exempt California employee. (Class Action Compla...

Excerpt: ...preliminary approval. I. BACKGROUND Defendant is in the business of providing railway services. (First Amended Complaint (FAC), ¶ 2.) Plaintiff worked for Defendant in California as a non‐exempt employee during the time period at issue. (Id., ¶¶ 10, 27.) He alleges that he and other employees were not paid all wages (including minimum and overtime wages) due to Defendant's rounding of time punches in its own favor and failing to include ince...

Excerpt: ...cussed below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion.1 I. BACKGROUND According to the operative complaint, Defendant is a California corporation that produces and manufactures solar cell panels and related cell manufacturing equipment, employing over 300 people. (First Amended Complaint (FAC), ¶ 11.) Plaintiff began working for Defendant as an hourly, non‐exempt employee in January 2013. (Id., ¶ 8.) He worked as an electrical mechanical technici...

Excerpt: ...nes (or both) apply to save her claims against the second employer. The second employer, Defendant SJMEC, Inc., filed a demurrer to the First Amended Complaint (FAC) based on the untimely PAGA notice. The Court sustained the demurrer with leave to amend. Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint (SAC), to which SJMEC again demurred, and then a Third Amended Complaint (TAC), which mooted the demurrer to the SAC. Now before the Court is SJMEC and ...

Excerpt: ... contractor “in charge of safety and conditions of the real property.” (Id. at ¶¶ 9 & 74.) Plaintiff Jose Antonio Arcega Lopez (“Lopez”) was “employed by Cold Storage Design & Build, LLC [(Cold Storage Manufacturing (‘CSM')], a subcontractor on the … site.” (Id. at ¶ 76.) Highridge, H‐P, and SBCC allegedly “owned, controlled, leased, operated, maintained, surveyed, engineered, planned, designed, manufactured, assembled, dis...

Excerpt: ...onetary and monetary sanctions against Plaintiff for asserted violations of the Court's March 22, 2021 order (the March 22 Order), which granted in part FEV's motion to compel Plaintiff to provide further responses to discovery requests. Plaintiff opposes the motion for sanctions and seeks monetary sanctions against FEV for bringing it. Also at issue is FEV and Innogy SE's motion to seal an exhibit filed in opposition to FEV's motion for summary ...

Excerpt: ...tlement, which is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS preliminary approval, subject to a few modifications to the class notice. I. BACKGROUND Defendant is a Washington corporation that owns, operates and/or manages SAVERS, a chain of second hand clothing stores throughout California. (First Amended Complaint (FAC), ¶ 1.) Plaintiff Rick Melead was employed at a Yorba Linda SAVERS as a non‐exempt sales clerk from October 2015 to Octo...

Excerpt: ...tlement, which is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS preliminary approval, subject to a few minor changes to the class notice. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the operative Complaint, Defendant is a California corporation that provides property management services. (Complaint, ¶ 8.) Plaintiff began working for Defendant on April 4, 2018 and was terminated on September 4, 2019. (Id., ¶ 7.) She worked in Morgan Hill as a Community Manage...

Excerpt: ... the modifications to the class notice and settlement agreement requested by the Court. I. BACKGROUND Veggie Grill sells food to the general public in restaurants in California, as well as gift cards. (Complaint, ¶¶ 15–16.) Within the 12 months before the Complaint was filed, Plaintiff visited a Veggie Grill location in California and used a gift card to make a purchase. (Id., ¶ 25.) Her remaining balance was less than $10, but Veggie Grill'...

Excerpt: ...nes (or both) apply to save her claims against the second employer. The second employer, Defendant SJMEC, Inc., filed a demurrer to the First Amended Complaint (FAC) based on the untimely PAGA notice. The Court sustained the demurrer with leave to amend. Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint (SAC), to which SJMEC again demurred, and then a Third Amended Complaint (TAC), which mooted the demurrer to the SAC. Now before the Court is SJMEC and ...

Excerpt: ...plication for determination of good faith settlement, which the Court DENIES for the reasons discussed below. The Court GRANTS the City's application. Also at issue is the City's motion to dismiss plaintiffs Dara Keo, Armando Rutherford, Angelina Lopez, Conseulo Luna, Audelia Miranda, and Anselmo Morales for delay in prosecuting the action. SCVWD moves to join in this motion, and its joinder is GRANTED. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS the mo...

Excerpt: ...l errors occurred at trial: 1. “First, the jury's verdict was inconsistent in that it ruled that the error at issue was unintentional but also not bona fide.” (9/3/21 MLG Opening Brief, at p. 2.) 2. “Second, the “bona fide element” was an error of law that never should have been presented to the jury.” (Id.) 3. “Third, the damages were overstated and not supported by admissible evidence.” (Id.) Ms. Guzman opposes this motion. I. L...

Excerpt: ... due to the still‐toobroad scope of its release. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs are residents of California and Massachusetts who purchased SunPower Solar Modules12 in 2016. (Complaint, ¶¶ 11–14.) Installing a residential solar power system requires a substantial up‐front investment by the homeowner, to be defrayed by the benefits that the system will generate over its useful life. (Id., ¶ 21.) These benefits include utilities savings, tax ben...

Excerpt: ...ow, the Court is inclined to grant preliminary approval, but requires further information to evaluate Plaintiff's motion. I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff was employed by Defendant from January 11, 2016 until March 9, 2018 as a non‐ exempt employee in Santa Clara County. (Complaint, ¶ 5.) She alleges that Defendant used a rounding system that systematically deprived employees of compensable hours by almost always understating the actual hours worked. (...

Excerpt: ...which is unopposed. On October 12, 2021, Plaintiff filed a supplemental submission and declaration explaining that the parties have modified the settlement to address the Court's concerns with its prior treatment of employees' claims under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). As discussed below, the Court GRANTS preliminary approval to the modified settlement, subject to a few further modifications to the class notice. I. BACKGROUND On Au...

Excerpt: ...ewalk located directly across the street from the cross‐section of Tully Road and Lake Cunningham. This sidewalk is owned and controlled by defendant City of San Jose (“City”). (First Amended Complaint [“FAC”] at Prem. L‐1.) The sidewalk in this location was raised and had a depression which created a height difference between slabs of concrete measuring roughly 3 to 3 ½ inches. (Ibid.) While walking, Plaintiff tripped and fell as a ...

Excerpt: ...diary of China Science and Merchant Investment Management Group Co. Ltd. (“CSC Group”), which is not a party to this case. According to the allegations in the FAC, Defendants Veronica Wu (“Wu”) and Purvi Gandhi (“Gandhi”) co‐owned HCI Investments, LLC (“HCI”), which they formed on October 30, 2018. The FAC contends that Wu and Gandhi engaged in multiple instances of self‐dealing and other wrongdoing. In April 2015, Wu was hire...

Excerpt: ...and started two competing companies. Before the Court is Foresite and cross‐defendant James Tananbaum's motion for leave to amend the Complaint to correct a typographical error. GenapSys and defendant Hesaam Esfandyarpour filed a response to this motion, but do not oppose it. Also at issue are the following unopposed motions to seal: (1) GenapSys's motion to seal portions of its opposition to Mr. Tananbaum's demurrer to the First Amended Cross�...

Excerpt: ...s's motion to compel source code repositories, which Cisco opposes. Plaintiff also brings an unopposed motion to seal materials lodged by Cisco in opposition to the motion to compel. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS both motions. I. BACKGROUND A. Factual According to the operative Third Amended Complaint (TAC), ConnectBeam was the first integrated social software platform that combined “social bookmarking, tagging, social networking, expert...

Excerpt: ...s unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS preliminary approval. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the operative First Amended Complaint (FAC), Plaintiff worked for Defendant from April 2017 through May 2020 as a non‐exempt employee in Santa Clara County. (FAC, ¶ 7.) He and similarly situated employees were underpaid due to Defendant's failure to properly include shift differentials and other non‐base hourly wages in their regular rates of ...

Excerpt: ...sachusetts who purchased SunPower Solar Modules1 in 2016. (Complaint, ¶¶ 11–14.) Installing a residential solar power system requires a substantial up‐front investment by the homeowner, to be defrayed by the benefits that the system will generate over its useful life. (Id., ¶ 21.) These benefits include utilities savings, tax benefits, increased property values, and, where applicable, Solar Renewable Energy Certificates (SRECs).2 (Id., ¶ ...

Excerpt: ...an Gettings, only one of which is opposed. As discussed below, the Court DENIES the second motion to quash, so the first one is MOOT. I. BACKGROUND1 Mr. Gettings filed his first motion to quash service of summons on April 7, 2021, challenging Plaintiffs' attempt to serve him at Palantir's business address because he had not worked for Palantir since 2015. Plaintiffs filed a notice of non‐opposition to that motion, explaining that they did not o...

Excerpt: ...alifornia Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, California Civil Code sections 1788‐1788.33 (RFDCPA). Before the Court are Ms. Guzman's demurrers to answers to the operative First Amended Class Action Cross‐Complaint (FAXC) by (1) Cross‐Defendant CCS and (2) CrossDefendants Patenaude & Felix and Todd Christopher Simonson (collectively, P&F). CrossDefendants oppose these demurrers. As discussed below, the Court SUSTAINS the demurrer ...

Excerpt: ...complaint, Defendant is in the calibration lab and software services industry, performing laboratory calibration and industry repair services. (Complaint, ¶ 6.) From November 2017 to December 2018, Ms. Kelly was employed by SIMCO in Santa Clara as a Calibration Technician, B. (Id., ¶ 5.) Plaintiff's duties included performing calculations, calibrations, and quality control checks for tools and other testing equipment, which at times required he...

Excerpt: ... and the Court's analysis of the settlement and settlement class are set forth in that order. Before the Court is the parties' joint motion for final approval of the settlement and for approval of Plaintiff's 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, “questions whether a [class action] settlement was...

Excerpt: ...n for fraudulent transfer of assets. According to the allegations of the operative complaint (“Complaint”), on December 9, 2011, Plaintiff filed a complaint against his broker, defendant Daniel C. Susott (“Daniel”), for financial abuse of an elder, conversion, neglect, physical abuse of an elder and the wrongful death of John and Daniel's mother, Kathryn C. Susott. (Complaint, ¶ 15.) The action, filed in Monterey County Superior Court an...

Excerpt: ...al property located at 15455 Via Caballero in Monte Sereno (the “Property”). (Complaint, ¶ 4.) The parties each maintain an undivided 50% interest in the Property as tenants in common, which was initially formed in October 2007. (Id., ¶¶ 4, 9, 10 and Exhibits B and C.) However, their relationship is such that it is no longer feasible to continue to own the Property together and therefore Katherine seeks its partition by sale. (Id.) Morgan ...

Excerpt: ...liminary approval of a settlement, which is unopposed. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS preliminary approval. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the operative First Amended Complaint (FAC), Plaintiff worked for Defendant from approximately July 2019 to August 2020 as a nonexempt employee, helping customers obtain home financing. (FAC, ¶ 17.) He and similarly situated employees regularly worked overtime and were paid non‐discretionary remuneration...

Excerpt: ... 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. I. LEGAL STANDARDS FOR SETTLEMENT APPROVAL A. Class Action Generally, “questions whether a [class action] settlement was fair and reasonable, whether notice to the class was adequate, whether certification...

Excerpt: ...nia. (First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), ¶ 6.) Plaintiff worked for Defendant as a non‐exempt packing room employee from October 2015 until she resigned in October 2016. (Id., ¶ 5.) She alleges that Defendant “fail[ed] to provide employees with accurate itemized wage statements.” (Id., p. 1.) Based on this theory, she asserts a single cause of action under PAGA. The parties have now reached a settlement. Plaintiff moves for an order app...

Excerpt: ...rom the COVID‐19 pandemic and associated public health orders. As explained below, the Court SUSTAINS Sequoia's demurrer with 30 days' leave to amend. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the operative complaint, Plaintiff operates a boutique hotel in Bodega Bay in Sonoma County. Beginning in March 2020, the State of California and Sonoma County issued a series of Public Health Orders addressed to the COVID‐19 pandemic, which forced businesses includi...

Excerpt: ... Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary approval of a settlement. As discussed below, the Court DENIES preliminary approval to the settlement in its current form, but invites the parties to meet and confer concerning possible modifications to the settlement. I. BACKGROUND These related actions were consolidated in October 2020, pursuant to a stipulated order. Plaintiffs filed the operative First Amended Consolidated Class and Representative Action Co...

Excerpt: ... order. Before the Court are Plaintiff's motions for final approval of the settlement and for approval of her attorney fees, costs, and service award. Plaintiff's motions are unopposed. As discussed below, the Court is inclined to grant both motions, but with a reduction in attorney fees. In addition, the Court requires additional information to evaluate them and make a final decision. I. LEGAL STANDARD FOR SETTLEMENT APPROVAL Generally, “quest...

Excerpt: ...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 Action Generally, “questions whether a [class action] settlement was ...

Excerpt: ...urt is a demurrer by Mr. Stoll and Mr. Robbins (“Director Defendants”) on the grounds that the claims against them are derivative in nature and Plaintiff lacks standing to bring derivative claims; the derivative claims must be dismissed because Flora's corporate status has been voided by the State of Delaware; and Plaintiff otherwise fails to state a cause of action.14 (See Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subds. (b) and (e).)15 Plaintiff opposes ...

Excerpt: ...s and representative claims, as well as her individual claims for harassment and constructive wrongful termination, and granted its motion to strike her punitive damages allegations, all with leave to amend. Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) dropping her claims for harassment and punitive damages but re‐alleging the other claims. Now, Apple again demurs to the class and representative claims and the individual claim for con...

Excerpt: ...al. I. BACKGROUND Defendant is a Delaware limited liability company doing business in California, and provides professional and specialized staffing services to clients across the United States. (Complaint, ¶ 10.) Plaintiff worked for Defendant as a content moderator from September 2018 to November 23, 2019. (Id., ¶ 7.) He was a non‐exempt, hourly employee. (Ibid.) Plaintiff was paid various nondiscretionary incentive wages, including “Shif...

Excerpt: ...ing on costs pending appeal, to strike Acer's entire memorandum of costs, or, alternatively, to tax $146,409.32 in costs. Through its opposition, Acer reduces its cost request to a total of $152,650.35, but it otherwise opposes Intellisoft's motion. As a threshold matter, Intellisoft contends that the Court lacks jurisdiction to award costs and/or should stay the issue because Intellisoft has appealed from the judgment against it. This argument l...

Excerpt: ...tion and similar relief other than public injunctive relief, and STAYS the action pending arbitration. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the Complaint, the Pixel 3 defects (the “Defects”) “are two‐fold: (1) the Pixel camera suffers from a malfunctioning autofocus feature, which causes the screen display to go black or the camera application to fail altogether; and (2) the Pixel's battery drains at an accelerated pace after a short period of nor...

Excerpt: .... Goodwill opposes the motion in all respects, and argues that it is partially moot in light of its service of amended responses. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion in part and DENIES in it large part. The Court DENIES Plaintiff's request for monetary sanctions. I. BACKGROUND A. Allegations of the Operative Complaint According to the operative First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff worked at Goodwill from March to June 2017. He n...

Excerpt: ...moting scam videos on the YouTube platform, selling targeted ads that drive traffic to such videos, falsely verifying YouTube channels that carry such videos, and providing other false and misleading information to promote them. In an order filed on June 10, 2021, the Court sustained Defendants' demurrer on the basis that Plaintiffs' claims are barred by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (the “CDA”).12 It granted Plaintiffs 30 day...

Excerpt: ...on 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 Action Generally, “questions whether a [class action] settlement was fair and reasonable, whether notice to the class was adequate, whether certification of the class was proper, and whether the attorney f...

Excerpt: ...dants' demurrer on the grounds that Plaintiff fails to allege either demand refusal or demand futility as required to support the derivative claims, and otherwise fails to state a cause of action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).) Defendants also move to require Plaintiff to furnish a $50,000 bond pursuant to Corporations Code section 800, subdivision (c).6 Plaintiff opposes both motions. As discussed below, the Court SUSTAINS the demurrer...

Excerpt: ...filed an opposition on July 15, 2021. 3 As discussed below, the Court OVERRULES Defendant's demurrer. I. BACKGROUND As alleged in the operative complaint, in November 2019, Plaintiff rented a residential apartment in a building Defendant owns in Milpitas and paid a $995 security deposit. (Class Action Complaint, ¶¶ 2–3, 5, 18–20.) When she vacated her apartment on June 24, 2020, Defendant overcharged her security deposit and failed to show ...

Excerpt: ...s's motion to compel source code repositories, which Cisco opposes. Cisco also seeks unspecified sanctions in connection with its opposition. As discussed below, the Court DENIES Leadfactors's motion and DENIES Cisco's request for sanctions. I. BACKGROUND A. Factual According to the operative Third Amended Complaint (TAC), ConnectBeam was the first integrated social software platform that combined “social bookmarking, tagging, social networking...

Excerpt: ...OUND The factual and procedural background to this action is summarized in the Court's April 27th, 2021 order granting Acer's motion for summary judgment (the Order), and is not repeated here. The first page of the Order summed up the Court's reasoning in granting summary judgment: Intellisoft does not seek an injunction, but instead monetary relief. And its sole theory of monetary relief for all claims is not viable in light of the undisputed fa...

Excerpt: ...der. 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 Action Generally, “questions whether a [class action] settlement was fair and reasonable, whether notice to the class was adequate, whether certification of the cla...

Excerpt: ... Family Holding ApS (JPTB)—seek damages and other relief. Before the Court is a demurrer by individual cross‐ defendants Kathy Pesic and Iliya Pesic (the Pesics) to all of the clams asserted against them in the Amended Cross‐Complaint (FAXC). (Code Civ. Proc., 430.10, subd. (e).) As discussed below, the Court SUSTAINS the Pesics' demurrer with leave to amend. I. BACKGROUND Silvaco commenced this action by filing a complaint for declaratory ...

Excerpt: ...precertification discovery to identify a new class representative. I. BACKGROUND A. Factual As alleged in the Complaint, Plaintiff was employed by Flagship in San Jose as a nonexempt, hourly employee. (Complaint, ¶ 2.) She worked as a janitor exclusively in the Bay Area. (Ibid.) Plaintiff alleges that she and other janitors employed by Defendant were not paid all earned wages, including overtime; were not provided timely, compliant meal and rest...

Excerpt: ...ons. I. BACKGROUND A. Factual According to the operative Fourth Amended Complaint (4AC), McGee is an airline service provider and a wholly owned subsidiary of Alaska Airlines. (4AC, ¶ 2.) Plaintiff Ferdinand Batin was employed by Defendant in California as a non‐exempt employee from August to November of 2018, while Plaintiff Nicolette Macleary has been employed in that capacity since January of 2019. (Id., ¶¶ 3–4.) Each plaintiff has rece...