Response

Cal. Super. - 6th Dist.September 11, 2017

co c 3 \O 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 17CV315727 Santa Clara - Civil Spencer C. Skeen, CA Bar No. 182216 spencer.skeen@ogletree.com Tim L. Johnson, CA Bar No. 265794 tim.johnson@ogletree.com Jesse C. Ferrantella, Bar No. 279131 jesse. ferrantella@ogletree.com OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P 4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 990 San Diego, CA 92122 Telephone: 858-652-3100 Facsimile: 858-652-3101 Electronically Filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 2/8/2019 2:41 PM Reviewed By: R. Walker Case #17CV315727 &E nvelope: 2492061 Attorneys for Defendants MAGNOLIA HI-FI, LLC and BEST BUY STORES, L.P. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA PAUL HANCOCK, as an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, VS. MAGNOLIA HI-FI, LLC, a Washington Limited] Liability Company, BEST BUY STORES, L.P., a Virginia Limited Partnership, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants. Case No. 17CV315727 [Assigned for all purposes to The Honorable Brian C. Walsh, Dept. 1] DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S SEPARATE STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Action Filed: March 28, 2018 Trial Date: None set DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S SEPARATE STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT NH Oo 0 3 S N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 23 26 27 28 Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 437¢c(b)(1) and Rule of Court 3.1350, Defendants Magnolia Hi-Fi, LLC and Best Buy Stores, L.P. (“Defendants”) submitted a Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, together with references to supporting evidence, in support of their Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff did not file an opposing statement pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 437¢(b)(3) or Rule of Court 3.1350. Plaintiff instead filed a stand-alone “Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts,” which Defendants respond to as follows: Sc! 1. On November 22, 2017, Plaintiff uploaded | Disputed as vague and ambiguous; a copy of the First Amended Class Action | immaterial. Vague and ambiguous as to Complaint for Damages which included as a | “First Amended Class Action Complaint for second cause of action violation of Labor Code | Damages” and “uploaded.” Immaterial on section 2698, et seq. the grounds the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004’s (“PAGA”) administrative Evidence: exhaustion requirements must be met before Declaration of Larry W. Lee, Exhibit A filing a PAGA claim and are “a condition of suit.” Williams v. Superior Court (2017) 3 Cal. 5th 531, 545 (quoting Lab. Code § 2699.3). 2. On March 28, 2018, Plaintiff uploaded to | Disputed as vague and ambiguous; the LWDA, a copy of the Second Amended | immaterial. Vague and ambiguous as to Complaint. “Second Amended Complaint,” “uploaded,” and “LWDA.” Immaterial on the grounds Evidence: PAGA’s administrative exhaustion Declaration of Larry W. Lee, Exhibit A requirements must be met before filing a PAGA claim and are “a condition of suit.” Williams v. Superior Court (2017) 3 Cal. 5th 531, 545 (quoting Lab. Code § 2699.3). DATED: February 8, 2019 OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. Spencer C. Skeen Tim L. Johnson Jesse C. Ferrantella Attorneys for Defendants 37353806.1 1 DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S SEPARATE STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Electronically filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 2/8/2019 2:41 PM PROOF OF SERVICE Reviewed By:R. Walker Hancock v. Magnolia Hi-Fi, LLC, et al. Case #17CV315727 Case No. 17CV315727 Env #2492061 I am and was at all times herein mentioned over the age of 18 years and not a party to the action in which this service is made. At all times herein mentioned I have been employed in the County of San Diego in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. My business address is 4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 990, San Diego, California 92122. On February 8, 2019, I served the following document(s): DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S SEPARATE STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT by placing [_] (the original) [X] (a true copy thereof) in a sealed envelope addressed as stated on the attached mailing list. Ol BY MAIL: I placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices. [ am readily familiar with the practice of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart P.C.’s practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid. BY MAIL: I deposited the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service, with the postage fully prepaid at 4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 990, San Diego, California 92122. BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: I placed the sealed envelope(s) or package(s) designated by the express service carrier for collection and overnight delivery by following the ordinary business practices of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart P.C., San Diego, California. Iam readily familiar with Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart P.C.’s practice for collecting and processing of correspondence for overnight delivery, said practice being that, in the ordinary course of business, correspondence for overnight delivery is deposited with delivery fees paid or provided for at the carrier’s express service offices for next-day delivery. BY FACSIMILE by transmitting a facsimile transmission a copy of said document(s) to the following addressee(s) at the following number(s), in accordance with: [] the written confirmation of counsel in this action: ] [State Court motion, opposition or reply only] Code of Civil Procedure section 1005(b): 1 [Federal Court] the written confirmation of counsel in this action and order of the court: X] Ll Hancock v. Magnolia Hi-Fi, LLC, et al. Case No. 17CV315727 BY E-MAIL OR ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: Based on a court order or an agreement of the parties to accept service by e-mail or electronic transmission, I caused the documents to be sent to the person(s] at the e-mail addresses listed on the attached service list. I did not receive, within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. Larry W. Lee, Esq. SBN 228175 Attorney for Plaintiff and the Class DIVERSITY LAW GROUP, APC 515 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 1250 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Tel: (213) 488-6555 Fax: (213) 488-6554 Iwlee®diversitylaw.com William L. Marder, Esq. Attorney for Plaintiff and the Class POLARIS LAW GROUP 501 San Benito Street, Suite 200 Hollister, CA 95023 Tel: (831) 531-4214 Fax: (831) 634-0333 bill@polarislawgroup.com Edward W. Choi, Esq. SBN 211334 Attorney for Plaintiff and the Class LAW OFFICES OF CHOI & ASSOCIATES A Professional Corporation 515 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 1250 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Tel: (213) 381-1515 Fax: (213) 465-4885 edward.choi@choiandassciciates.com (State) 1 declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. (Federal) - I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the State Bar of this Court at whose direction the service was made. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the above is true and correct. Executed on February 8, 2019, at San Diego, California. Erika Schmidt Zs. ply Type or Print Name Signature 31565682.1