NoticeCal. Super. - 6th Dist.December 28, 2018ATTORNEY OR PARTY WI.THOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address): Allison C. Eckstrom, CA Bar No. 217255; Michael E. Olsen, CA Bar No. 307358 BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1500 Irvine, CA 92612 TELEPHONE NO.: 949-223-7000 FAX NO. (Optional): 949-7100 E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional): michael. olse n@bclplaw.com ATTORNEY FOR (NameJ: Defendant AS Solution North America, Inc. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANT A CLARA sTREET ADDREss: 161 N. First Street MAILING ADDRESS: cITY AND zIP coDE: San Jose, CA 95113 BRANCH NAME: PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: STEVEN HELTON DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC., et al. AMENDED NOTICE OF STAY OF PROCEEDINGS To the court and to all parties: 1. Declarant (name): Michael E. Olsen FOR COURT USE ONLY CASE NUMBER: 18CV340240 JUDGE: Peter Kirwan DEPT.: 19 a. IZ! is D the party IZ! the attorney for the party who requested or caused the stay. CM-180 b. D is D the plaintiff or petitioner D the attorney for the plaintiff or petitioner. The party who requested the stay has not appeared in this case or is not subject to the jurisdiction of this court. 2. This case is stayed as follows: a. IZ! With regard to all parties. b. D With regard to the following parties (specify by name and party designation): 3. Reason for the stay: a. D b. 0 C. □ Automatic stay caused by a filing in another court. (Attach a copy of the Notice of Commencement of Case, the bankruptcy petition, or other document showing that the stay is in effect, and showing the court, case number, debtor, and petitioners.) Order of a federal court or of a higher California court. (Attach a copy of the court order.) Contractual arbitration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.4. (Attach a copy of the order directing arbitration.) d. 0 Arbitration of attorney fees and costs under Business and Professions Code section 6201. (Attach a copy of the client's request for arbitration showing filing and service.) e. IZI Other: Attached is a copy of the Notice of Removal filed in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. A Notice to Adverse Parties and State Court of Removal was filed on March 4, 2017. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: March 13, 20019 Michael E. Olsen ►f/;JJU--- (TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF DECLARANT) Form Adopted for Mandalay Use Judicial Council of California CM-180 [Rev. January 1, 2007] NOTICE OF STAY OF PROCEEDINGS (SIGNATURE) Page 1 of 1 Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.650 www.courtinfo.ca.gov American LegalNet, Inc. www.FormsWorkflow.com Electronically Filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 3/13/2019 3:20 PM Reviewed By: Y. Chavez Case #18CV340240 Envelope: 2623098 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO n. 0 11 ..JO ...J"' "'� UJ UJ ..,- 12 z t::...-" =iU>V a. -N z "' � 13 0:::: U) I- o: N :i:o "' � z <( 14 UJ OU ...J UJ z <( J: - oo> _ 15 - 0: z:,; - «� >-CD o:� 16 m"' 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 1 of 6 Allison C. Eckstrom, California Bar No. 217255 allison.eckstrom@bclplaw.com Michael E. Olsen, CA Bar No. 307358 michael.olsen@bclplaw.com BRYAN CA VE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1500 Irvine, California 92612-4414 Telephone: (949) 223-7000 Facsimile: (949) 223-7100 Attorneys for Defendant AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION STEVEN HELTON, Plaintiff, v. AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC., a Georgia corporation, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants. USA0l\12534757 Case No. (Santa Clara County Superior Court Case No. l 8CV340240) NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION BY DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NOJ,lTH AMERICA, INC . UNDER 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441 AND 1446 [DIVERSITY JURISDICTION] [Filed concurrently with Civil Cover Sheet; Certification of Interested Entities; Corporate Disclosure Statement] NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 a. 0 11 .J 0 .J"' w w.., 12 z ':: T"" "'""' �(/)"If a. .� z w � 13 o?::w ,-o: "' :i:O °' � z <( 14 woo .J U) - w -' w > W z .. :i: - (.)�� 15 z::i - «� >-«> o:� 16 m<'> 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 2 of 6 TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, AND TO PLAINTIFF STEVEN HELTON AND HIS ATTORNEY OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant AS Solution North America, Inc. ("Defendant"), hereby removes this action from the Superior Court of the State of California, for the County of Santa Clara (the "State Court"), to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, on the grounds that this Court has original jurisdiction over this civil action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. sections 1332(a) 1441 and 1446, and all other applicable bases for removal. The facts supporting the Court's original jurisdiction were true at the time Plaintiff Steven Helton ("Plaintiff') filed his First Amended Complaint in this matter and remain true as of the date of the filing of this Notice of Removal, as more fully set forth below: I. PLEADINGS AND PROCEEDINGS 1. On December 28, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Summons and Complaint against Defendant in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, case number l 8CV340240 (the "State Action"), entitled Steven Helton, Plaintiff v. AS Solution North America, Inc., a Georgia Corporation, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants." A true and correct copy of the State Action, together with the Summons and Civil Case Cover Sheet, is attached as Exhibit 1. 2. On December 31, 2018, Plaintiff caused the State Action to be served on Defendant. A true and correct copy of the Proof of Service is attached as Exhibit 2. 3. On January 30, 2019, Defendant filed an Answer to the original Complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit 3. Due to an administrative error, the Answer was rejected by the Court Clerk, on February 6, 2019, because the Defendant's name on the Answer did not match the original Complaint. Per the State Action's docket, a true and correct copy of which is attached as Exhibit 4, the Answer to the original Complaint was deemed filed on February 7, 2019. 4. On January 29, 2019, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint against Defendant (the "FAC"). A true and correct copy of the FAC, together with the Civil Lawsuit Notice, is attached as Exhibit 5. USAOl\12534757 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 a. 0 11 ..JO --'"' ww .,. 12 ,Z !:::: r, CJ) :,v :;:{/)-.:t a. ► N � � � 13 ,-o:N :i:o "' � z <( 14 woo ..JCJ) - w -' w > W z ., J: - u�� 15 z:; - -=� >-«> -=� 16 al"' 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 3 of 6 5. On January 31, 2019, Plaintiff caused the FAC to be personally served on Defendant. A true and correct copy of the Proof of Service is attached as Exhibit 6. 6. On February 13, 2019, Defendant caused an Answer to FAC to be filed and served by mail on Plaintiff. A true and correct copy of the Answer to First Amended Complaint is attached as Exhibit 7. 7. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1446(d), Defendant will provide prompt written notice of this Notice of Removal to all adverse parties and to the Clerk of the State Court. II. TIMELINESS OF REMOVAL 8. This action has not previously been removed to federal court. 9. In general, a defendant must file its notice ofremoval within 30 days after receipt of the pleading in the state action that sets forth a removable claim. 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b)(l ). This Notice of Removal is timely. The 30th day to remove falls on Saturday, March 2, 2019. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 6(a)(l)(C), if the last day to perform an act falls on a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, the period continues to run to end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday. See also Froehlich v. CACH, LLC, 289 F.R.D. 454, 455-56 (S.D. Ohio 2013) (holding that removal petition was timely where 30th day fell on a Sunday and defendant removed the following Monday); Hardy v. Square D Co., 199 F. Supp. 2d 676,681 (N.D. Ohio 2002) (holding that, since the last day to remove fell on a Saturday, "the last day on which Defendant could have filed is extended to Monday"); Medina v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 945 F. Supp. 519,521 (W.D. N.Y 1996) (removal was timely where 30th day fell on a Saturday and defendant removed the following Monday). Here, the next day that is not a- Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday is Monday March 4, 2019. Accordingly, Defendant's removal is timely because the removal took place on March 4, 2019, and within one year of Plaintiffs filing of the State Action. III. DIVERSITY JURISDICTION 10. This is a civil action of which this Court has original diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, and is properly removable pursuant to the provisions of28 U.S.C. sections 1441(a) and (b ), because it is a civil action in which the amount in controversy exceeds the sum of USA0J\12534757 NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q. 0 11 JO _,"' UJ UJ ., 12 z �T"" U) ::, ., �(1)"¢ n. -� z "'� 13 0::: UJ z .: :c - ()�� 15 z::;;- .:� >- co o:� 16 ID"' 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 4 of 6 $75,000, exclusive of costs and interest, and is between citizens of different states, as set forth below. A. 11. Complete Diversity Of Citizenship Exists Between Plaintiff And Defendant. The F AC, on its face, establishes complete diversity of citizenship because Plaintiff and Defendant are citizens of different states. 12. Specifically, Plaintiff is a citizen of the State of California. See F AC ,r 4 (indicating Plaintiff is a resident of San Mateo County). AS Solution North America, Inc. is a Georgia Corporation with its headquarters and principal place of business in Atlanta, Georgia. See FAC, ,r 5. 13. The citizenship offictitiously-named "Doe" defendants is to be disregarded for the purposes ofremoval. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b). Thus, the existence of Doe Defendants 1 through 50 does not deprive this Court of jurisdiction. 14. Accordingly, because Plaintiff is a citizen of California and Defendant is a citizen of Georgia, complete diversity of citizenship exists for removal purposes. B. The Amount In Controversy Exceeds $75,000. 15. Plaintiff asserts claims for: (1) failure to pay overtime wage; (2) failure to pay minimum wage; (3)-failure to provide/authorize meal periods; (4) failure to provide/authorize rest periods; (5) failure to provide all wages upon discharge; (6) unfair competition; and (7) conversion. See FAC ,r,r 16-20. 16. Although Defendant denies any wrongdoing or liability to Plaintiff, based on the allegations, claims, and prayer for relief set forth in the F AC, the amount-in-controversy easily exceeds the jurisdictional minimum amount of $75,000. 17. Specifically, Plaintiffs F AC seeks, among other sources of damages, the following: (1) general damages in the amount of$2502000 on each cause of action for which such damages are available; (2) special damages according to proof; (3) exemplary damages in excess of $1,000,000 on each cause of action for which such damages are available; and ( 4) costs of suit. See FAC, Prayer, ,r,r 1-4. USA0J\12534757 NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0..0 11 ..JO ...J"' w w .., 12 z !:: T"" V) ""' :;: (/) ' W z <: I - t) 0 > 15 - 0: z::,; - .:� >- CD -=� 16 m., 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 5 of 6 18. An action may be removed if Defendant establishes, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the aggregate amount-in-controversy exceeds the jurisdictional amount of $75,000. See Abrego v. Dow Chemical Co., 443 F.3d 676, 683 (9th Cir. 2006); Bank of Cal. Nat'! Ass 'n v. Twin Harbors Lumber Co., 465 F.2d 489, 491 (9th Cir. 1972) .. Here, Plaintiffs FAC, on its face, expressly alleges damages that far exceed the requisite $75,000 amount in controversy. Indeed, Plaintiffs FAC expressly seeks at least $1.25 million in damages, excluding attorneys' fees and costs. (FAC, Prayer, ,r 1.) A reasonable person reading the FAC would conclude that Plaintiff is "more likely than not" seeking an amount greater than $75,000. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); Sanchez v. Monumental Life Ins. Co., I 02 F.3d 398, 402 (9th Cir. 1996) (noting that the plaintiff himself "has placed the requisite jurisdictional amount in controversy by requesting damages in excess of the jurisdictional amount ... this is especially true where the complaint was originally filed in state court (with the requisite federal jurisdictional amount pleaded in the request for relief because it is highly unlikely .. . the plaintiff would have inflated his request for damages solely to obtain federal jurisdiction")). Based upon the foregoing, the amount in controversy in this action easily exceeds the jurisdictional minimum of $75,000. 19. For these reasons, this action is a civil action over which this Court has original jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S. C. section 1332, and which may be removed to this Court by Defendants pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1441 based on diversity jurisdiction IV. THE PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS OF 28 U.S.C. § 1446 ARE SATISFIED 20. The venue for removal lies in this Court because Plaintiffs action is pending in this district and division. See 28 U.S. C. § 1441(a). Under 28 U.S.C. § 144l (a), this case may properly be removed to the San Jose Division of the Northern District of California because Plaintiff filed this case in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara. · See also 28 U .S.C. § 84(c)(3). 21. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. §1446(a), copies of all process, pleadings, and orders served upon Defendant are attached as Exhibits to this Notice. 22. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), a copy of this Notice is being served upon counsel for Plaintiff, and a notice will be filed with the Clerk of the Superior Court of California USA0l\12534757 4 NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 0..0 11 ..JO ..J"' o:� w w ..,. 12 z !::T"" "'::>"' W z ., J: - uo> 15 - 0: z::;; - .,� >- 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 6 of 6 for the County of Santa Clara. Notice of Compliance shall be filed promptly afterwards with this court. V. CONCLUSION Because this civil action -is between citizens of different states and the matter in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court exercise its removal jurisdiction over this action. Dated: March 4, 2019 USA0l\12534757 Allison C. Eckstrom Michael E. Olsen BRYAN CA VE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP By: Isl Michael E. Olsen Michael E. Olsen Attorneys for Defendants AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC .. NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 1 of 12 Exhibit 1 - i x ‘ 1‘ i . ‘ Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-1 Filed 03/04/19 ) {,7; hf 1}'• ?if' SUM-100 SUMMONS (CIT A CION JUDICIAL) NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: (AVISO AL DEMANDADO): FOR COURT USE ONLY (SOLO PARA USO OE LA CORTE} E-FILED 12/28/201_8 2:52 PM Clerk of CourtAS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC., a Georgia Corporation, and DOES I through 50, inclusive YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF: (LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE): STEVEN HELTON Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara 18CV340240 ·" Reviewed By: L Del Mundo Envelope: 2319314 NOTICEI You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the informalion below. You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this summons and legal papers are served on you to file a written response at this court and have a copy served on the plaintiff. A letter or phone call will not protect you. Your wrillen response must be in proper legal form If you want the court to hear your case. There may be a court form that you can use for your response. You can find these court fom,s and more lnformaUon at the California Courts Online Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/sel"1elp). your county law libraiy, or the courthouse nearest you. If you cannol pay the filing fee, ask lhe court clerk for a fee waiver form. If you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case by defaull, and your wages, money, and property may be taken without further wamlng from the court. There are other legal requirements. You may wanl lo call an attorney right away. if you do not know an attorney, you may want to call an attorney referral service. If you cannot afford an attorney, you may be eligible for free legal services from a nonprofit legal services program. You can locate these nonprofit groups at the California Legal Services Web site (www.lawhelpcalifomla.org), the California Courts Onllne Self-Help Center (www.courtlnfo.cs.gov/sel"1elp), or by contacting your local court or county bar association. NOTE: The court has a statutory lien for waived fees and costs on any settlement or arbitration award or $10,000 or more in a civil case. The court's lien must be paid before the court will dismiss the case. IAVISOI Lo h1m demendedo. Si no responde dentro de 30 dfas, la corte puede decldlreri su contra sin escuchar su versi6n. Lea la informec/6n,a continuaci6n. Tiene 30 DIAS DE CALENDAR/0 despu6s de que le entreguen esta c/taci6n y papeles legs/es para presents, una respuesta por escrlto en este corte y hacer que se entregue una cop/a el demandente. Una carta o una llamada telef6nica no lo protegen. Su respuesta por escrlto tfene que estar en formsto legal con-ecto si desea que procesen su caso en la corte. Es posible que haya un formularfo que usted pueda user para su respuesta. Puede encontrar estos formularios de la corte y mas /nfonnac/6n en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de Califomla fWWW.Sucorte.ca.govJ, en la biblioteca de /eyes de su condado o en la corte qua le quede mas cerca. Si no puede pagar la cuota de presentacion, pida al secretario de la corte que le dti un formulario de exencl(m de pago de cuotas. Si no presents su respvesta a 1/empo, puede perr:Jer el caso por incumplfmlento y la corte le podra quitar su sue/do, dinero y bienes sin mas advertencia. Hay otros requlsitos legates. Es recomendable que /lame a un abogado inmedlatamente. SI no conoce a un abogado, puede llamar a un servicfo de remlsi6n e abogados. SI no pueda pager a un ebogado, es posible que cumpla con los requisitos para obtener servlclos legates gratuftos de un program& de servlclos legales sin fines de lucro. Pueda encontrar estos grupos sin fines de lucro en el sitio web de Califomla Legal Se,v/ces, (www.lawhelpcalifomia.org), en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de Ca/ifomla, (www.sucorte.ca.govJ o ponifmdose en contecto con la corte o el colegfo de abogados locales. AV/SO: Por ley, la corte tiene derecho a reclamar las cuotas y /os costos exentos por imponer vn gravamen :sobre cualqu/er recuperaci6n de $10,000 6 mils de valor recibida med/ante un acuerclo o una conces/6n de arbftraje en un caso de derecho civil. Tlene que pager el gravamen de la corte antes de que la corte pueda desecher el caso. The name and address of the court is: (El nombre y direcci6n de le corte es): Santa Clara County Superior Court 161 N. First Street San Jose, CA 951 13 CASE NUMBER: (Na/lltlro dlll C/150}: 18CV340240 The name, address, and telephone number of plaintiffs attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney, is: (El nombre, la direcci6n y el mimero de telefono def abogado de/ demandante, o de/ demandante que no tiene abogado, es): Drew Lewis, The Lewis Law Office PC, 1100 Alma St. Suite 209, Menlo Park, CA 94025; 650-665-9000 DATE: 12/28/2018 2:52 PM Clerk of Court Clerk, by L Del Mundo (Fecha) (Secretario) (For proof of service of this summons, use Proof of Service of Summons (form POS-010).J (Para prueba de entrega de esta citati6n use el formulan·o Proof of Service of Summons, (POS-010)). NOTICE TO THE PERSON SERVED: You are served 1. D as an individual defendant. 2. c::J as the person sued under the fictitious name of (specify): 3, [iJ on behalf of (specify): A� Solution North America, Inc., a Georgia Corporation , Deputy (Adjunto) under: OCI CCP 416.10 (corporation) CJ CCP 416.60 (minor) CJ CCP 416.20 (defunct corporation) CJ CCP 416.70 (conservatee) F011n Adopled for Mar.Jalory Uso Judicial Counal OI California SUM-100 (Rev. Jtly I, 20091 CJ CCP 416.40 (association or partnership) CJ CCP 416.90 (authorized person) . D other (specify): 4. [53-by personal delivery on (date): \ "2,,; • SUMMONS Pa • 1 ol 1 Code OI Civil Ptocedure §§ 412,20. 465 www.coul1inlo ca g0v Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 3 of 12 ATTORNEY OR PARTY IMTHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, Sta/a Bar numbar, ond odrlre&•J: ,--- Drew Lewis (SBN 309288) The Lewis Law Office, PC FOR COURT USE ON� V 1100 Alma Street, Suite 209 Menlo Park, CA 94025 E I t · II F. 'I dTELEPHONENO.; 650-665-9000 FAXNO.; ec romca Y I e ATTORNEY FOR/Name): Plaintiff STEVEN HELTON t y Superior Court of CA, 1-s.:..:uP;...:.E::c.:R.::.:10.::.;R.:..:c.::.:oc:..,uR""r""o""'F;...c:....AL.;...1F...:...o...:...R...:...N1:....A....:, c:....o:...:u::;.NTY____:o"'"F-S .;..;; a::..nt::..a_C ,::.,-.la_ra __ ---------�c ounty of Santa Clara, srR E ET AoORess: 191 N. First St. c n 12/28/2018 2:52 PM CM-010 MAlllNG ADDREss: F eviewed By: L Del Mundo c1tv ANoz1P cooe: San Jose, CA 95 I 13 c ase ·#18CV340240 BRANCH NAME: CASE NAME: c nvelope: 2319314 Steven Helton v. AS Solution, Inc., et al. CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET Complex Case Designation CAS E NUMB ER: 18CV340240 [Z] Unlimited D Limited _ D Counter D Joinder (Amount (Amount JUOO E : demanded demanded is Filed with first appearance by defendant exceeds $25,000) $25,000 or less) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.402) O E PT: Items 1-6 below must be comJJleted (see instructions on JJage 2). 1. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case: Auto Tort Contract D Auto (22) D Breach of contract/warranty (06) D Uninsured mot orist (46) D Rule 3.740 collecUons (09) Other Pl/PD/WO !Personal Injury/Property 0□ o1n t s h u e r r aconce lle co cti v o e n r s ag ( Oe 9 ( ) 18)Damage/Wrongful Death) Tort D Asbestos (04) D Other contract (37) D Pr oduct liability (24) Real Property Provlslonally Complex Clvll Litigation (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.40�3.403) D Antilrusl!Trade regulation (03) D Construction defect (10) D Mass tort (40) D Sec urities llligallon (28) D Environmental/Toxic tort (30) D Medical malpractice (45) D Eminent domain/Inverse D Other Pl/PD/WO (23) condemnellon (14) Non-Pl/f:ltJ/Wtl (Other) Tort D Wrongful eviction (33) D Insurance coverage claims arising from the above listed provisionally complex case types (41) D D Other real property (26)Business tort/unfair business p r actice (07) D Civil right s (08) D Defamation (13) D Fraud(16) Enforcement of Judgment D Enforcement of Judgment (20) Mlscellaneous Civil Complalnt D RICO (27) D lnt ellect uai" property (19) D D Professional negligence (25) Other non-Pl/PD/WO tort (35) �toyment Unlawful Detainer D Commercial (31) D Resident ial (32) D Drugs(38) • Judicial Review D Asset forfeiture (05) D Other complaint (not specified above)"(42) Mlscellaneous Civil Petition LJ Wrongful termination (36) [Z] Other employment (15) D Petition re: arbitraUon award (11) D Writ of mandate (02) D Partnership and corporate governance (21) D Other petition (not specified above) (43) D Other judicial review (39 ) 2. This case LJ is LLI is not complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court. If the case is complex, mark the factors requiring exceptional judicial management: a. D i.arge number of separately represented parties b.0 Extensive motion practice raising difficult or novel issues that will be time-consuming to resolve c. D Substantial amount of documentary evidence 3. Remedies sought (check all that apply): a.[Z] monetary 4. Number or causes of action (specify): 7 5. This case D is [Z] is not a class action suit. d. D Large number of witnesses e. D Coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court f. D Substantial postjudgment judicial supervision b. [Z] nonmonetary; declaratory or injunctive relief c. D punitive 6. If there are any known related cases, file and seive a notice of related case. (You may us i:, fo CM-015.) Date: December 28, 2018 rl\ . Drew Lewis, Esq. ► � MM,\ {TYPE OR PRINT NAME) L-----,s=1GNA=1=uc-=R=e=oF�P�AR=TY�o=R-A=n""o""RN""'E'"'Y=Fo=R""P,.,.AR=TY,,.,...) ---- NOTICE • Plaintiff must file this cover sheet with the first paper filed in the action or proceeding (except small claims cases or cases filed under the Probate Code, Family Code, or Welfare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.220.) Failure to file may result in sanctions. • File this cover sheet in addition to any cover.sheet required by local court rule. • If this case is complex under rule 3.400 et seq. of the California Rules of Court, you must serve a copy or this cover sheet on all other parties to the action or proceeding. • Unless this is a collections case under rule 3.740 or a complex case, this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes onlv. P-ane 1 ol 2 Fonn Adapled rar Mandatory u,e Judicial Council or Cal�otria CM-010 IRev. July 1,_ 2007) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET eai. Rues 01 C®1, n.1es 2.30, 3.220, 3.AoG-3.403, 3.740; Cel. Slandards ol Judicial Adminislta�on. std. 3. \ O 1YWW.c:oultinfo.c.r.gov Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 4 of 12 CM-010 INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE COVER SHEET To Plaintiffs and Others Filing First Papers . If you are filing a first paper (for example, a complaint) in a civil case, you must complete and file, along with your first paper, the Civil Case Cover Sheet contained on page 1. This infonnation wlll be used to compile statistics about the types and numbers of cases flied. You must complete items 1 through 6 on the sheet. In Item 1, you must check one box for the case type that best describes the case. If the case fits both a general and a more specific type of case listed in item 1, check the more specific one. If the case has multiple causes of action, check the box that best indicates the primary cause of action. To assist you in completing the sheet, examples of the cases that belong under each case type in item 1 are provided below. A cover sheet must be filed only with your initial paper. Failure to file a cover sheet with the first paper filed in a civil case may subject a party, its counsel, or both to sanctions under rules 2.30 and 3.220 of the California Rules of Court. To Parties in Rule 3.740 Collections Cases. A "collections case" under rule 3.740 is defined as an action for recovery of money owed in a sum stated to be certain that is not more than $25,000, exclusive of interest and attorney's fees, arising from a transaction in which property, services, or money was acquired on credit. A collections case does not include an action seeking the following: (1) tort damages, (2) punitive damages, (3) recovery of real property, (4) recovery of personal property, or (5) a prejudgment writ of attachment. The identification of a case as a rule 3.740 collections case on this form means that it will be exempt from the general time-for-service requirements and case management rules, unless a defendant files a responsive pleading. A rule 3. 740 collections case will be subject to the requirements for service and obtaining a judgment in rule 3.740. To Parties in Complex Cases. In com.plex cases only, parties must also use the Civil Case Cover Sheet to designate whether the case is complex. If a plaintiff believes the case is complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules or Court, this must be indicated by completing the appropriate boxes in items 1 and 2. If a plaintiff designates a case as complex, the cover sheet must be served with the complaint on all parties to the action. A defendant may file and serve no later than the time of its first appearance a joinder in the plaintiffs designation, a counter-designation that the case is not complex, or, if the plaintiff has made no designation, a designation that the case is complex. CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES Auto Tort Contract Auto (22)-Personai Injury/Property Breach of Contract/Warranty (06) Damage/Wrongful Death Breach of Rental/Lease Uninsured Motorist (46) (if the Contract (not unlawful detainer case involves an uninsured or wrongful eviction) motorist claim subject to Contracvwarranty Breach-Seller arbitration, check this Item Plaintiff (not fraud or negligence) instead of Auto) Negligent Breach of ContracV Other Pl/PD/WO (Personal Injury/ Warranly Property Damage/Wrongful Death) Other Breach of Contract/Warranty Tort . Collections (e.g., money owed, open Asbestos (04) book accounts) (09) Asbestos Property Damage Collection Case-Seller Plaintiff Asbestos Personal Injury/ Other Promissory Note/Collections wrongful Death Case Product Liability (not asbestos or Insurance Coverage (not provlslonally toxic/environmental) (24) complex) (18) Medical Malpractice (45) Auto Subrogation Medical Malpractice- Other Coverage Physicians & Surgeons Other Contract (37) Olher Professional Health Care Contractual Fraud Malpractice Other Contract Dispute Other Pl/PD/WO (23) Real Property Premises Liability (e.g., slip Eminent Domain/Inverse and fall) Condemnation (14) Intentional Bodily Injury/PD/WO wrongful Eviction (33) (e.g., assault, vandalism) Other Real Property (e.g., quiet title) (26) tntentionaf Infliction or Writ of Possession of Real Property EmoUonaf Distress Mortgage Foredosure Negligent Infliction of Quiet TIiie Emotional Distress Other Real Property (not eminent Other PI/PD/\MJ domain, landlordlfenant, or Non-Pl/PD/WO (Other) Tort foreclosure) Business Tort/Unfair Business Unlawful Detainer Practice (07) Commercial (31) Civil Rights (e.g., discrimination, Residential (32) false arrest) (not civil Drugs (38) (if the case Involves illegal harassment) (08) drogs, check this Item; otherwise, Defamation (e.g., slander, libel) report as Commen;;ial or Residential) (13) JLidlclal Review Fraud (16) Asset Forfeiture (05) Intellectual Property (19) PetlUon Re: Arbllratlon Award (11) Professional Negligence (25) Writ of Mandate (02) Legal Malpracllce Writ-Administrative Mandamus· Other Professional Malpractice Writ-Mandamus on Limited Court (not medical or legal} Case Matter Olher Non-Pl/PD/WO Tort (35) writ-Other Limited Court Case Employment Wrongful Termination (36) Other Employment (15) CM.010 !Rev. July I, 2007) Review Other Judicial Review (39) Review of Health Officer Order Notice or Appeal-Labor Commissioner Appeals CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation (Cal. Rules of Court Rules 3.400-3.403) AnlltrusVT rade Regulation (03) Construction Defect (10) Claims Involving Mass Tort (40) Securities Litigation (28) EnvlronmenlalfToxlc Tort (30) Insurance Coverage Claims (arising from provisionally complex case type listed above} (41) Enforcement of Judgment Enforcement of Judgment (20) Abstract of Judgment (Out of County) Confession of Judgment (non- domestic relations) Sister State Judgment Administrative Agency Award (not unpaid taxes} Petition/Certification of Entry of Judgment on Unpaid TaKes Other Enforcement of Judgment Case Miscellaneous Civil Complaint RICO(27) Other Complaint (not specified above} (42) Dedaralory Relief Only Injunctive Relief Only (non- harassment} Mechanics Lien Other Commercial Complaint Case (non-tort/non-complex) Other Civil Complaint (non-tort/non-complex) Miscellaneous Civil Petition Partnership and Corporate Governance (21) Olher Petition (not specified above) (43) Civil Harassment Workplace Violence Elder/Dependent Adult Abuse Election Contest Petition for Name Change Petition for Relief From Late Claim Olher Clvll Petition Pago 2 al Z Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1�1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 5 of 12 E-FILED Drew Lewis (SBN 309288) THE LEWIS LAW OFFICE, PC 2 1100 Alma Suite 209 Menlo Park, CA 94025 12/28/2018 2:52 PM Clerk of Court Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara 18CV340240 3 Tel: (650) 665-9000 Email: drew@lewislg.com Reviewed By: L Del Mundo 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Attorneys for STEVEN HELTON SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA STEVEN HELTON, Plaintiff, vs. AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, JNC., a Georgia Corporation, and DOES I through 50, inclusive, Defendants. Case No.: 18CV340240 1. Failure to pay overtime wage (Lab. Code §§ 510, 1194) 2. Failure to pay minimum wage (Lab. Code§ 1194 and IWC Wage Orders) 3. Failure to provide/authorize meal period (Lab. Code§§ 226.7, 512, IWC Wage Orders) 4. Failure to provide/authorize rest periods (Lab. Code§ 226.7, IWC Wage Orders) 5. Failure provide all wages upon discharge (Lab. Code§§ 201-203) 6. Unfair Competition (B&P § 17200 et seq.) 7. Conversion (Cal. Civ. Code§ 3336, 3294) INTRODUCTION I. This Complaint is brought by Pia inti ff Steven Helton ("Plaintifr• or "Helton") who 24 worked for AS Solution North America, Inc. ("Defendant" or "AS Solution" or "Com�any"), a 25 private security finn based out of Georgia St�te. From about October" 2015 through Apri I of 2017, 26 Helton worked as an Executive Protection Agent. During this time, Defendant characterized 27 Helton as a nonexempt employee and paid Helton a salary. Helton was paid his salary rate, but 28 Defendan� failed to pay him for all overtime worked. Plaintiff now brings this action to recover PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 6 of 12 unpaid wages, interest and other damages resulting from Defendant's violation of the California 2 Labor Code. 3 JURJSDICTION & VENUE 4 2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction to hear this case because the amount in 5 controversy exceeds this �ourt's jurisdictional minimum. 6 3. Venue as to each Defendant is proper because Defendant's obligations and liability 7 arose, at least in part, therein, and because the alleged injuries sustained by Plaintiff, occurred in s the County of Santa Clara, California. 9 PARTIES 10 4. Plaintiff is an individual over the age of eighteen ( 18). At al I relevant times If herein, Plaintiff was a California resident, residing in San Mateo County. 12 5. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereupon alleges that Defendant AS Solution 13 North America, Inc. is a Georgia corporation with its principal place of business in Atlanta, 14 Georgia. 15 6. Plaintiff does not know the true names and,capacities of Defendants sued in this 16 Complaint as DOES I through 50, inclusive, and therefore sues these Defendants by fictitious 17 names. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to allege the true names and capacities of DOES I 18 through 50, inclusive, when ascertained. Plain ti ff is informed and believes, and on that basis 19 alleges, that each of the Defendants named herein as DOES I through 50, inclusive, is responsive 20 in some manner for the occurrence, injury and other damages alleged in this Complaint. 21 7. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that each Defendant 22 was in some manner responsible for the acts and damages alleged herein, and/or are indebted to 23 Pia inti ff as alleged herein, and that each Defendant was the agent, employer and co-conspirator of 24 each other Defendant, and was acting in the course and scope of such agency and conspiracy. In 25 this Complaint where Plaintiff refers to Defendant singularly, such reference shall be construed to 26 ' be a reference to all Defendants named herein, including those named fictitiously. 27 28 8. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS AS Solution North America, Inc. ("Defendant,, or "AS Solution" or "Company") 2 PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 7 of 12 is a private security firm. According to its website, AS Solution specializes in executive 2 protection services for corporations and also serves high net worth individuals, family offices, 3 NGOs, celebrities and embassies. 4 9. · Helton was employed by AS Solution as a private executive security guard from 5 2015 to 2017. 6 10. AS Solution extended its initial offer on or around October I 6, 2015, to Helton for 7 the position of "Executive Protection Agent" as a nonexempt full-time employee. 8 . II. Melton's initial offer included a 30-day probationary period at the beginning of his 9 employment. Helton's compensation during this 30-day period was a $500 per day salary. Io During this probationary period Helton worked numerous overtime hours. 11 12. After the probationary period ended, Helton continued with the Company and was 12 paid a semi-monthly salary of$4,583.33. This salary increased during his employment. 13 13. During all times relevant to this Complaint, Helton regularly worked more than 8 14 hours per day. However, given that he was a nonexempt salaried employee, he was not 15 compensated for any overtime hours worked. 16 14. During the times when Helton worked, he was never relieved of all duty. You 17 were required to have your cell phone and radio on to be.available respond if called or paged. 18 Helton, was therefore, never provided legally-compliant meal and rest periods. 19 15. In or around April 2017, Plaintiff quit his employment with AS Solution. 20 Defendant failed to pay Helton all wages owed, including unpaid overtime and meal and rest 21 premiums within 72 hours Helton's quitting. 22 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Failure to Pay Overtime Wage 23 (Labor Code §§ 510, 1194) 24 16. Plaintiff incorporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the 25 preceding paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 26 17. Labor Code § 510 requires employers to pay overtime compensation to all 27 employees, unless they are exempt from the overtime pay requirements. During all periods of 28 employment, Plaintiff was a non-exempt employee: PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 8 of 12 18. Labor Code § 5 I 5(d)(2) provides that "[p]ayment of a fixed salary to a nonexempt 2 employee shall be deemed to provide compensation only for the employee's regular, nonovertime 3 hours, notwithstanding any private agreement to the contrary." 4 19. During all periods of employment, Plaintiff worked in excess of eight (8) hours in 5 a workday. 6 20. · Defendant failed or otherwise refused to pay Plaintiff overtime compensation for 7 all overtime hours worked in the manner required by California law. 8 21. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unlawful conduct, as set forth 9 herein, Plaintiff suffered damages, including loss of earnings for hours of overtime worked on Io behalf of Defendant. 11 12 13 14 22. 23. Plaintiff requests relief as described below. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION Failure to Pay Minimum Wage (Labor Code§§ 1194, 1197, 1197.1, IWC Wage Orders) Plaintiff incorporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the 15 preceding paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 16 24. Labor Code§§ 1194, 1197, 1197.1 and Industrial Welfare Commission ("IWC") 17 Wage Order 4-2001 require employers to pay an amount equal to or greater than the minimum 18 wage for each hour worked in excess of 8 in a workday and 40 in a workweek. 19 25. Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff at least the minimum wage for each overtime 20 hour worked. 21 26. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unlawful conduct, as set forth 22 herein, Plaintiff has suffered damages, including loss of earnings for time worked on behalfof 23 Defendant. 24 25 26 27 27. 28. Plaintiff requests relief as described below. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION Failure to Provide Meal Periods (Labor Code§§ 226.7, 512, IWC Wage Orders) Plaintiff incorporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the 28 preceding paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein .. PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 9 of 12 29. Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of five (5) hours in a workday without being 2 provided with a meal period of at least thirty minutes during which they were relieved of all duty, 3 as required by Labor Code§§ 226.7 and 512 and IWC Wage Order No. 4-2001. 4 30. When an employer fails to provide such a meal period, the employer is required to 5 pay the employee as wages one additional hour of pay at the employee's regular rate of 6 compensation. Defendant has failed to pay this additional meal period compensation to Plaintiff. 7 31. Defendant failed to provide a meal period to Plaintiff where he was free of all duty 8 when he worked more than 5 hours per workday. 9 32. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unlawful conduct, as set forth Io herein, Plaintiff has sustained damages, including loss of earnings, from unpaid meal periods. 11 12 13 14 33. I. Plaintiff requests relief as described below. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION Failure to Provide Rest Periods (Labor Code§ 226.7, IWC Wage Orders) Plaintiff in�orporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the 15 preceding paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 16 2. Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of four (4) hours in a workday without being 17 provided with a paid rest period of at least ten minutes during whi(?h they were relieved of all 18 duty, as required by IWC Wage Order No. 4-200 I. 19 3. When an employer fails to provide such a rest period, the employer is required to 20 pay the employee as wages one additional hour of pay at the employee's regular rate of 21 compensation. Defendant has failed to pay this additional rest period compensation to Plaintiff. 22 4. Defendant failed to provide.a rest period to Plaintiff where he was free of all duty 23 when he worked more than four hours per workday. 24 5. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unlawful conduct, as set forth 25 herein, Plaintiff has sustained damages, including loss of earnings, from unpaid rest periods. 26 6. Plaintiff requests relief as described below. 27 /// 28 /// PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 10 of 12 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION Failure to Pay All Wages Upon Discharge (Labor Code§§ 201-203) 7. Plaintiff incorporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the preceding paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 8. Labor Code§§ 201 and 202 require Defendant to pay their employees all wages due immediately upon discharge, or within seventy-two (72) hours of quitting without notice. Labor Code§ 203 provides that where an employer willfully fails to make such timely payment, the employer must, as a penalty, continue to pay the subject employees' wages until the back wages are paid in full or an action is commenced, up to a maximum of thirty (30) days' wages. 9. Plaintiff quit without notice in or about April 2017, however Defendant failed to pay all wages that were due to Plaintiff within the time required by Labor Code§§ 201 and 202. Defendant's failure to pay these wages has been and continues to be willful. 10 At:. a rnsnlt of De.fondant's conduct, Phtintiff is entitled to waiting time pemllties in the amount of up to thirty (30) days' wages under Labor Code§ 203. 11. Plaintiff requests relief as desc�ibed below. SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION Unlawful Business Practices (Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq.) 12. Plaintiff incorporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the preceding paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 13. Defendant's conduct, as alleged herein, constitutes an unlawful, unfair, and/or fraudulent business practices, as set forth in Business· & Professions Code § I 7200. Defendant conducted business activities while failing to comply with the legal mandates cited herein. Plaintiff and others similarly situated suffered injury in fact and lost money as a result of Defendant's unfair competition. 14. As a result of Defendant's unlawful and unfair business practices, Plaintiff is entitled to and do seek restitution, and other appropriate relief available under Business & Professions Code§ 17203, on their own behalf, and on behalf of others similarly situated. 15. Plaintiff requests relief as described below. rLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 11 of 12 16. SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION Conversion (Civ. Code §§ 3336, 3294) Plaintiff incorporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the preceding paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 17. Defendant wrongfully withheld earned wages and other monies from Plaintiff. In particular, Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff wages earned under the law. 18. At all relevant times, Defendant had and continue to have a legal obligation imposed by law to pay Plaintiff all earned wages and other compensation due to them. Such_ wages and compensation belonged to Plaintiff at the time they provided labor and services. Accordingly, such wages and compensation are the property of Plaintiff and not Defendant. 19. Defendant knowingly and intentionally failed to pay Plaintiff these wages. Plaintiff is entitled to immediate possession of all amounts converted by Defendant, with interest, as well as any and all profits that Defendant acquired by their unlawful conversion. 20. Defendant's actions constituting conversion were oppressive, malicious, and · fraudulent. 21. Plaintiff requests relief as described below. PRAYER WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendant,jointly and severally, as follows: I. For general damages according to proof, on each cause of action for which such damages are available; 2. For special damages, according to proof, on each cause of action for which such damages are available; 3. For reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit incurred herein pursuant to Labor Code § 218 .5 and any other relevant provision under California law that provides for attorneys' fees; 4. For equitable, declaratory and injunctive relief to the extent available under law; 5. For statutory penalties to the extent available under law; and PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-1 Filed 03/04/19 Page 12 of 12 Dated: 6. For such other and further relief as th� Court deems proper and just. December 28, 2018 By: Respectfully submitted, THE LEWIS LAW OFFICE, PC Drew Lewis ,Attorney for Plaintiff PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-2 Filed 03/04/19 Page 1 of 2 Exhibit 2 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-2 Filed 03/04/19 Page 2 of 2 0. CT Corporation Service of Process Transmittal 12/31/2018 CT Log Number 534657790 TO: Registered Agent Department Business Filings Incorporated (Recipient Account Only) 8020 Excelsior Dr Ste 200 Madison, WI 53717-1998 RE: Process Served in California FOR: AS Solution North America, Inc. (Domestic State: GA) ENCLOSED ARE COPIES OF LEGAL PROCESS RECEIVED BY THE STATUTORY AGENT OF THE ABOVE COMPANY AS FOLLOWS: TITLE OF ACTION: DOCUMENT(S) SERVED: COURT/AGENCY: NATURE OF ACTION: ON WHOM PROCESS WAS SERVED: DATE AND HOUR OF SERVICE: JURISDICTION SERVED APPEARANCE OR ANSWER DUE: ATTORNEY(S) / SENDER(S): ACTION ITEMS: SIGNED: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: STEVEN HELTON, PLTF. vs. AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC., ETC., ET AL., DFTS. Summons, Cover Sheet, Instructions, Complaint Santa Clara County - Superior Court - San Jose, CA Case# 18CV340240 Employee Litigation Business Filings Incorporated, Sacramento, CA By Process Server on 12/31/2018 at 14:44 California Within 30 days after this summons Drew Lewis THE LEWIS LAW OFFICE, PC 1100 Alma Suite 209 Menlo Park, CA 94025 650-665-9000 CT has retained the current log, Retain Date: 01/01/2019, Expected Purge Date: 01/06/2019 Image SOP Email Notification, Registered Agent Department ctsop@bizfilings.com Business Filings Incorporated 818 West Seventh Street Los Angeles, CA 90017 213-337-4615 Page 1 of 1 / SV Information displayed on this transmittal is for CT Corporation's record keeping purposes only and is provided to the recipient for quick reference. This information does not constitute a legal opinion as to the nature of action, the amount of damages, the answer date, or any Information contained In the documents themselves, Recipient is responsible for Interpreting said documents and for taking appropriate action. Signatures on certified mall receipts confirm receipt of package only, not contents. Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-3 Filed 03/04/19 Page 1 of 9 Exhibit 3 1 I I i Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-3 Filed 03/04/19 Page 2 of 9 1 BRYAN CA VE LEIGHTON P AISNER LLP Allison Eckstrom, CA Bar No. 217255 2 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1500 3 Irvine, CA 92612-4414 Telephone: (949) 223-7000 4 Facsimile: (949) 223-7100 5 Attorneys for Defendant AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC. 6 7 Electronically Filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 2/7/2019 12:27 PM Reviewed By: S. Uy Case #18CV340240 Envelope: 2485351 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 11 STEVENHELTON, 12 13 v. Plaintiff, 14 AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC., a 15 Georgia corporation, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, . 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Defendants. 12444606.2 1 Case No.: 18CV340240 DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC.'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Date Action Filed: December 28, 2018 DEFEND�NT AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, IN°C.'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-3 Filed 03/04/19 Page 3 of 9 Defendant AS Solution North-America, Inc. ("Defendant") hereby responds to the 2 allegations contained in the Complaint ("Complaint") filed by Plaintiff Steven Helton ("Plaintiff') 3 as follows: 4 5 GENERAL DENIAL Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 431.30(d), Defendant denies generally and 6 specifically each and every alleg_ation contained· in the Complaint. Defendant further denies that 7 Plaintiff has been injured or damaged in any manner or amount or is entitled to any relief of any 8 kind. 9 10 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Defendant has not completed its investigation of the facts of this case, has not completed ; � 11 · d�scovery in this matter, and has not completed its preparation for trial. The affirmative defenses 0: - ww..,. � 5; 12 asserted herein are based on Defendant's knowledge, information, and belief at this time, and < 0,. n. ""' � j � 13 Defendant specifically reserves the right to modify, amend, or supplement any affirmative defense �z< � g O 14 contained herein at any time. Without conceding that it bears the burden of proof or persuasion as ��� -< :c - � � ; 15 to anyone of them, Defendant alleges the following separate affirniative defenses to the -<- >- co �;;; 16 Complaint: 17 18 19 1. FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to State a Claim) The Complaint, and each cause of_ action therein, fails to state. facts sufficient to 20 state a claim on which relief can be granted. 21 22 23 2. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Statute of Limitations) The Complaint; and each cause of action therein, is barred, in whole or in part, by 24 the applicable statute of limitations, including but not limited to California Code of Civil 25 Procedure Sections 337,_ 338, 339, 340, and 343, California Labor Code Section 200 et. seq., and 26 California Business and Professions Code Section 17208. 27 // 28 /// 12444606.2 1 DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NORTH AM£R1CA, INC.'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT a.o ..JO ..J"' 1 2 3 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-3 Filed 03/04/19 Page 4 of 9 3. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies) Plaintiff has failed to exhaust remedies available under statutes, regulations, rules 4 and procedures relating to the matters alleged in the Complaint, and he is barred by reason of his 5 failure to do so. 6 7 8 4. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Laches) The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred; in whole or in part, 9 because Plaintiff failed to raise his alleged claims in a timely fashion. 10 11 12 5. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Waiver, Estoppel, and Consent) The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred, in whole or in part, by 13 the doctrines of waiver, estoppel and consent. 14 15 16 6. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Unclean Hands) The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred, in whole or in part, by 17 the doctrine of unclean hands. 18 ·19 20 7. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Accord and Satisfaction) The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred, in whole or in part, by 21 the doctrine of accord and satisfaction. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Release) 22- 23 24 8. . The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred, in whole or in part, by · 25 the doctrine of release. 26 Ill 27 Ill 28 12444606,2 2 DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC. 'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT. 0.0 .JO ... "' "'� w w ,t � !::T"" 0'::, .,,. "f 0. ·N zw� 0 � CD I-"' "' :,:O "' !:!z< WO(.) � � ui > W z < :c - o�� z;!; - <� ,_ co 11:� m., 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-3 Filed 03/04/19 Page 5 of 9 NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Violation ofUnderlyin� State or Federal Law) 9. Defendant is not liable for unlawful business practices under California Hµsiness arid Professions Code Section 17200 et, seq. because it is not liable to Plaintiff for any alleged violation of any underlying state or federal laws. TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Unfair, Misleading, or Deceptive Business Practices) 10. · Defendant is not liable for violations of unfair business practices pursuant to California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 et. seq. because its business practices were not unfair, not deceptive, and not likely to mislead anyone. ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Adequate Remedy at Law) 11. The relief requested by Plaintiff pursuant to California Business and Professions Code Section 17200 et. seq. should be denied because Plaintiff has an adequate remedy at lf!.W, . TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Knowledge, Authorization, or Ratification) 12. Defendant is not liable for the alleged damages because, if any person or entity engaged in intentional, willful, or unlawful conduct as alleged in the Complaint, he/she/it did so without the knowledge, authorization, or ratification of Defendant. TIDRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to Mitigate) 13. Defendant is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that.Plaintiff, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, could have mitigated the all_eged mpnetary damages to himself and that Plaintiff failed to exercise such reasonable diligence and has not mitigated such alleged monetary damages. By reason thereof, Plaintiff is barred, in whole or in part, from recovering any damages from Defendant. II 28 II 12444606,2 3 DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC.'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT Q. 0 _, 0 _,"' a: - ww..,. z t: ..... ., :, ..,. ::Cw'T Q. ·<'I � �� ,-a: "' :cc °' �z< woo _,., w .J LU > W z < :c - o!:!� z::E - <- >- co a:- al<'> . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2� 24 25 26 27 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-3 Filed 03/04/19 Page 6 of 9 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Willfulness/Good Faith) 14. Defendant did not act willfully, intentionally or with knowledge or reckless disregard _as to whether their conduct violated California wage and hour laws. Rather, Defendant acted in good faith and had reasonable grounds for believing that its actions were in compliance with California wage and hour laws. FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Good-Faith Dispute) 15, The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, fails to state a claim for penalties, including penalties pursuant to Labor Code section 203, because there is a good faith dispute as to Defendant's obligation to pay any wages that may be found to be due. SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Privilege/Legitimate Business Reasons) 16. The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred, in whole or in part, because Defendant has an honest, good faith belief that all decisions, if any, affecting Plaintiff were made by Defendant solely for legitimate, business-related reasons that were neither arbitrary, c�pricious, nor unlawful and were reasonably based upon the facts as Defendant understood them. SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Attorneys' Fees Not Recoverable) 17. Plaintiff is precluded from recovering attorneys' fees from Defendant under applicable provisions of law. EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Due Process) 18. The Complaint is barred to the extent it violates Defendant's rights to due process and equal protection under the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, and other applicable law. II 28 II 12444606.2 4 DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC. 'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 2 3 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-3 Filed 03/04/19 Page 7 of 9 · NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Plaintiff's Own Conduct) 19. Plaintiffs claims are barred, in whole or in part, because, if Plaintiff suffered pr 4 sustained any damage, injury or detriment as alleged in ·the Complaint, such injury was caused by 5 Plaintiffs own conduct. 6 7 8 TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Offset) 20.- If it is de�ermined 'that Defendant owe monetary damages to Plaintiff, Defendant is 9 entitled to an offset to the extent Plaintiff owes· money to Defendant. 10 11 12 TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Entitlement to Injunctive Relief) 21. Plaintiff is precluded from recovering injunctive relief, either in whole or in part. 13 · Plaintiff has not and cannot allege or prove that irre�arable harm will result if injunctive r_elief is 14 denied.· 15 16 17 TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Provided All Meal/Rest Breaks) 22. Any recovery of meal or rest premium payments is barred because Plaintiff was 18 authori_zed and permitted to take appropriat_e meal and rest periods, but freely chose to forego or 19 waive such meal or rest periods; Defendant did not impede, discourage or dissuade Plaintiff from 20 taking appropriate meal or rest periods. 21 22 23 TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Unjust Enrichment) 23. Defendant alleges that Plaintiff has not suffered any losses and Defendant has not 24 been unjustly enriched as a result of any action by Defendants. Plaintiff is therefore not entitled to 25 any disgorgement or restitution. 26 II 27 // 28 // 12444606.2 5 DEFENDANTAS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC.'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 2 3 Case 5:19-cv-01193 . Document 1-3 Filed 03/04/19 Page 8 of 9 . TWENTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (All Wages Paid) 24. Defendant alleges that Plaintiff has been paid and/or received all wages due to him 4 by virtue of his employme_nt. 5 6 TWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 25. Defendant alleges that it presently has insufficient knowledge or information on 7 which to f01m a belief as to whether it may have additional, as yet unstated, defenses available. 8 Defendant reserves herein the right to assert additional defenses in the. �vent discovery_ or an· 9 investigation indicates they wo�ld be appropriate. 10 11 12 13 PRAYER WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for judgment as follows: 1. 2. That judgment be entered in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiff; That Plaintiff takes nothing by his- Complaint and that the Complaint herein 14 be dismissed, in its entirety, with prejudice; 15 16 3. 4. That Defendant be awarded its costs of suit herein; That Defendant be awarded reasonable attorneys' fees as may be determined 17 by the Court; and 18 19 5. For such othet relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 20 Dated: February 7, 2019 BRYAN CAVE LLP Allison C. Eckstrom 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 By: Allison C. Eckstrom Attorneys for Defendant AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC. 12444606.2 6 DEFENDAI':'T AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC.'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11· 0 12 . g ., : :; I- ., 13 - Ill 0.. :, -J Ul 10 J Iii� 14 Ill i: ,( > ii= - 6□�- z Z 0 15 ,( 0 I&. ► Ill :i � d 6 · 16u •- Ill ::E z - > 17 II)� .Cl) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-3 Filed 03/04/19 Page 9 of 9 PROOF OF SERVICE CCP 1013A(3) REVISED 5/1/88 Helton v. AS Solution North America, Inc. (Case No. 18CV340240) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My business address is: 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1500, Irvine, CA 92612-4414. On February 7, 2019, I served the foregoing document(s) described as: DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC.'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT on all interested parties in this action by placing l;gj a true copy D the original thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes aqdressed as-follows: · Drew Lewis, Esq. THE LEWIS LAW OFFICE, PC 1100 Alma, Suite 209 Menlo Park, CA 94025 Attorney for Plaintiff. Telephone: 650.665.9000 Email: drew@lewislg.com l;gj BY MAIL - As follows: I am "readily familiar" with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Irvine, California in the_ ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed · invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit.- � ST A TE - I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. · · Executed on February 7, 2019, at Irvine, California. A� ----- .. 12460639.1.1 PROOF OF SERVICE Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-4 Filed 03/04/19 Page 1 of 4 Exhibit 4 Details Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-4 Filed 03/04/19 Page 2 of 4 Case Information 18CV340240 I Steven Helton vs AS Solution North America. Inc. Case Number 18CV340240 C;:is8 Type Court Superior Court of Santa Clara Civil Other Employment Unlimited (15) Case Status Active Party Plaintiff Helton, Steven Defendant Active Attorneys ... Lead Attorney Lewis, Drew Retained Work Phone 650-665-9243 AS Solution North America, Inc. Active Attorneys ... Lead Attorney Eckstrom, Allison Retained Work Phone 949-223-7000 File Date 12/28/2018 https://cmportal.scscourt.org/Portal/Home/W orkspaceMode?p=O Page 1 of3 3/4/2019 Details Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-4 Filed 03/04/19 Page 3 of 4 · Events and Hearings 12/28/2018 Civil Case Cover Sheet 12/28/20'18 Complaint (Unlimited) (Fee Applies) ·12128/2018 Summons Issued/Filed , 0 I 103/20 \ 9 Proof of Service'. Summons DLR (Civil) ..,. Comment Proof of Service of Summons/Complaint 01/29/2019 Amended Complaint Filed - No Fee..,. C01nment First Amended Complaint 02/05/20 I 9 Proof of Se1vice Summons DLR (Civil) ..,. Comrnent Proof of Service of First Amended Complaint 0.2/06/2019 Clerk f,ejeclion Letter ..,. Comment The Defendant's name on the Answer to Complaint does not match the initial Complaint filed., env.#2448921 02/07/2019 Answer (Unlimited) (Fee Applies) ..,. Comment to Complaint, Atty Eckstrom 02/1 J/2019 Answer (Unlimited) (Fee Applies) ..,. Comment to 1st Amended Complaint. Atty Eckstrom https ://cmportal.scscourt.org/Portal/Home/W orkspaceMode?p=O Page 2 of 3 3/4/2019 Details Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-4 Filed 03/04/19 Page 4 of 4 04/08/2019 Conference: Case Management • Judicial Officer Strickland, Elizabeth Hearing Time 3:00 PM https://cmportal.scscourt.org/Portal/Home/Workspa�eMode?p=O Page 3 of 3 3/4/2019 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-5 Filed 03/04/19 Page 1 of 10 Exhibit 5 • 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-5 Filed 03/04/19 Page. 2i W/1_9-0'5,f'./t-.. Drew Lewis (SBN 309288) THE LEWIS LAW OFFICE, PC 1100 Alma Suite 209 Menlo Park, CA 94025 Tel: (650) 665-9000 Email: drew@lewislg.com Attorneys for STEVEN HELTON SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA STEVEN HELTON, Plaintiff, vs. AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERIC&,. 7NC., a Georgia Corporation, and DOES I -rtirough 50, inclusive, D�fendants. .... . ... Case No.: I 8CV340240 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1. Failure to pay overtime wage (Lab. Code §§ 510, 1194) 2. Failure to pay minimum wage (Lab. Code§ 1194 and IWC Wage Orders) 3. Failure to·provide/authorizc meal period (Lab. Code§§ 226.7, 512, IWC Wage -..;, .. Orders) _,. -· ... _ 4. _ Failure to provide/authorize rest periods (Lab. Code§ 226.7, IWC Wage Orders) 5. Failure provide all wages upon discharge (Lab. Code§§ 201-203) 6. Unfair Competition (B&P § 17200 et seq.) 7. Conversion (Cal. Civ. Code§ 3336, 3294) INTRODUCTION 1. This Complaint is brought by Plaintiff Steven Helton ("Plaintiff' or "Helton") who worked for AS Solution North America, Inc. ("Defendant" or "AS Solution" or ''Comp,lliy"), a private security firm based out of Georgia State. From al,out October 2015 through Apri I of 2017, Helton worked as an Executive Protection Agent. Du1fog this time, Defendant characterized Helton as a nonexempt employee and paid Helton a salury. Helton was paid his salary rule, but Defendant failed to pay him for all overtime worked. Plaintiff now bri"ngs this action lU recover PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLt\lNT Ca�c No.: I XCV340240 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-5 Filed 03/04/19 Page 3 of 10 unpaid wages, interest and other damages resulting from Defendant's violation of the California 2 Labor Code. 3 JURISDICTION & VENUE 4 2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction to hear this case because the amount in 5 controversy exceeds this Court's jurisdictional minimum. 6 3. Venue as to each Defendant is proper because Defendant's obligations and liability 7 arose, at least in part, therein, and because the alleged injuries sustained by Plaintiff, occurred in 8 the County of Santa Clara, California. 9 PARTIES 10 11 12 4. Plaintiff is an individual over the age of eighteen (18). At all relevant times herein, Plaintiff was a California resident, residing in San Mateo County. 5. Plaintiff is informed, believes and thereupon alleges that Defendant AS Solution 13 North America, Inc. is a Georgia corporation with its principal place of business in Atlanta, 14 Georgia. 15 6. ,: Plaintiff does n,ot know the true nam.�s and capacities of Defendants sued in this - ... -:- 16 Complaint as DOES I through 50, inclusive, and therefore sues these Defendants by fictitious - - - - - - ..... -- . ·- 17 names. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to allege the true names and capacities of DOES I J 8 through 50, inclusive, when ascertained. Plaintiff is info1med and believes, and on that basis 19 alleges, that each of the Defendants named herein as DOES I through 50, inclusive, is responsive 20 in some manner for the occurrence, injury and other damages alleged in this Complaint. 21 7. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, that each Defendant 22 was in some manner responsible for the acts and damages alleged herein, and/or are indebted to 23 Plaintiff as alleged herein, and that each Defendant was the agent, employer and co-conspirator of 24 each other Defendant, and was acting in the course and scope of such agency and conspiracy. In 25 this Complaint where Plaintiff refers to Defendant si_ngularly, such reference shall be construed to 26 be a reference to all Defendants named herein, including those named fictitiously. 27 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 28 8. AS Solution North A·merica, Inc. ("Defendant" or "AS Solution" or •·company'') 2 PLAtNTIFF"S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Cnsc No.: 18(\/340240 .. ... Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-5 Filed 03/04/19 Page 4 of 10 is a private security firm. According to its website, AS Solution specializes in executive 2 protection services for corporations and also serves high net worth individua)s1 family offices, 3 NGOs, celebrities and embassie.s. 4 9. Helton was employed by AS Solution as a private executive security guard from 5 2015 to 20l 7. 6 10. AS Solution extended its initial offer on or around October I 6, 2015, to Helton for 7 the position of "Executive Protection Agent" as a nonexempt full-time employee. 8 11. Helton's initial offer included a 30-day probationary period at the beginning of his 9 employment. Helton's compensation during this 30-day period was a $500 per day salary. Jo During this probationary period Helton worked numerous overtime hours. 11 12. After the probationary period ended, Helton continued with the Company and was 12 paid a semi-monthly salary of $4,583.33. This salary increased during his employment. 13 13. During all times relevant to this Complaint, Helton regularly worked more than 8 J 4 hours per day. However, given that he was a nonexempt salaried employee, he was not J 5 compensated for any overtime hours w(?rked, . - 16 14. During the times when Helton worked, he was never relieved of all duty. You 17 were required to have your cell phone and radio on to be available respond if called or paged. 18 Helton, wa_s therefore, never provided legally-compliant meal and rest periods. 19 20 21 22 23 24 15. In or around April 2017, Plaintiff quit his employment with AS Solution. Defendant failed to pay Helton all wages owed, including unpaid overtime and meal and rest premiums within 72 hours Helton 's quitting. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Failure to Pay Overtime Wage (Labor Code§§ 510, 1194) 16. Plaintiff incorporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the 25 preceding paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 26 17. Labor Code § 510 requires employers to pay overtime compensation to all 27 employees, unless they are exempt from the ove11ime pay requirements. During all periods of 28 employment, Plaintiff was a non-exempt employee . 3 PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Cose No.: I SC'\/340240 .. Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-5 Filed 03/04/19 Page 5 of 10 18. Labor Code § 515( d)(2) provides that "[p ]ayment of a fixed salary to a nonexempt 2 employee shall be deemed to provide compensation only for the employee's regular, nonovertime 3 hours, notwithstanding any private agreement to the contrary." 4 19. During all periods of employment, Plaintiff worked in excess of eight (8) hours in 5 a workday. 6 20. Defendant failed or otherwise refused to pay Plaintiff overtime compensation for 7 all overtime hours worked in the manner required by California law. 8 21. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unlawful conduct, as set forth 9 herein, Plaintiff suffered damages, including loss of earnings for hours of overtime worked on Io behalf of Defendant. 22. Plaintiff requests relief as described below. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION Failure to Pay Minimum Wage 11 12 13 14 (Labor Code§§ 1194, 1197, 1197.1, IWC Wage Orders) 23. Plaintiff i,ncorporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the 15 preceding paragrap_hs, as though fully set forth herein. 16 24. - . Labor Code§§ 1194, 1197, I 197.1 and Industrial Welfare Commission ("IWC") - - -- - -- --- ...,.. . --·- - --- . - ----· -- J 7 Wage Order 4-200 I require employers to pay an amount equal to or greater than the minimum J 8 wage for each hour worked in excess '!f 8 in a workday and 40 in a workweek. 19 25. 20 hour worked. Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff at least the minimum wage for each overtime 21 26. As a direct and proximate result ofDefendant's unlawful conduct, as set forth 22 herein, Plaintiff has suffered damages, including loss of earnings for time worked on behalf of 23 Defendant. 27. · Plaintiff requests relief as described below. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION Failure to Provide Meal Periods {Labor Code§§ 226.7, 512, I\VC Wage Orders) 24 25 26 27 28. Plaintiff incorporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the 28 preceding paragraphs, as though fully set fo11h herein. PLI\INTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COi\•IPLI\INT Case No.: I �C\1340240 -� Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-5 Filed 03/04/19 Page 6 of 10 29. Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of five (5) hours in a workday without being 2 provided with a meal period of at least thirty minutes during which they were relieved of all duty, 3 as required by Labor Code §§ 226.7 and 512 and IWC Wage Order No. 4-2001. 4 30. When an employer fails to provide such a meal period, the employer is required to 5 pay the employee as wages one additional hour of pay at the employee's regular rate of 6 compensation. Defendant has failed to pay this additional meal period compensation to Plaintiff. 7 31. Defendant failed to provide a meal period to Plaintiff where he was free of all duty g when he worked more than 5 hours per workday. 9 32. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unlawful conduct, as set forth 1 o herein, Plaintiff has sustained damages, including loss of earnings, from unpaid meal periods. 33. Plaintiff requests relief as described below. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION Failure to Provide Rest Periods (Labor Code§ 226.7, IWC Wage Orders) 11 12 13 14 I. Plaintiff incorporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the 15 preceding paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 16 2. Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of four ( 4) hours in a workday without being -.... --- --- - --- 17 provided with a paid rest period of at least ten minutes during which they were relieved of all t 8 duty, as required by IWC Wage Order No. 4-200 I. 19 3. When an employer fails to provide such a rest period, the employer is required to 20 pay the employee as wages one additional hour of pay at the employee's regular rate of 21 compensation. Defendant has failed to pay this additional rest period compensation to Plaintiff. 22 4. Defendant failed to provide a rest period to Plaintiff where he was f ree of all duty 23 when he worked more than four hours per workday. 24 5. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's unlawful conduct, as set forth 25 herein, Plaintiff has sustained damages, including loss of earnings, from unpaid rest periods. 26 6. Plaintiff requests relief as described below. 27 /// 28 /// Pl.1\INTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT C:,sc No.: I SC\1340240 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 - 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:1�-cv-01193 Document 1-5 Filed 03/04/19 Page 7 of 10 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION Failure to Pay All Wages Upon Discharge (Labor Code§§ 201-203) 7. Plaintiff incorporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the preceding paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 8. Labor Code§§ 201 and 202 require Defendant to pay their employees all wages due immediately upon discharge, or within seventy-two (72) hours of quitting without notice. Labor Code§ 203 provides that where an employer willfully fails to make such timely payment, the employer must, as a penalty, continue to pay the subject employees' wages until the back wages are paid in full or an action is commenced, up to a maximum of thirty (30) days' wages. 9. Plaintiff quit without notice in or about April 2017, however Defendant failed to pay all wages that were due to Plaintiff within the time required by Labor Code§§ 201 and 202. Defendant's failure to pay these wages has been and continues to be willful. I 0. As a result of Defendant's conduct, Plaintiff is entitled to waiting time penalties in the amount of up to thirty (30) days' wages under labor Code § 203. 11. --- 12. Plaintiff requests re.lief as described below. SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION Unlawful Business Practices (Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq.) Plaintiff incorporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the preceding paragraphs, as though fully set fo1th herein. 13. Defendant's conduct, as alleged herein, constitutes an unlawful, unfair, and/or fraudulent business practices, as set forth in Business & Professions Code § 17200. Defendant conducted business activities while failing to comply with the legal mandates cited herein. Plaintiff and others similarly situated suffered injury in fact and lost money as a result of Defendant's unfair competition. 14. As a result of Defendant's unlawful and unfair business practices, Plaintiff is entitled to and do seek restitution, and other appropriate relief available under Business & Professions Code* 17203, on their own behalf, and on behalf of 01hers similarly situated. 15. Plaintiff requests relief as described below. (, PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPL,\INT Case No.: I 8CV340240 . .... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-5 Filed 03/04/19 Page 8 of 10 SEVENTH CAUSE: OF ACTION Conversion (Civ. Code §§ 3336, 3294) 16. Plaintiff incorporates in this cause of action each and every allegation of the preceding paragraphs, as though fully set forth herein. 17. Defendant wrongfully withheld earned wages and other monies from Plaintiff. In particular, Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff wages earned under the law. 18. · At all relevant times, Defendant had and continue to have a legal obligation imposed by law to pay Plaintiff all earned wages and other compensation due to them. Such wages and compensation belonged to Plaintiff at the time they provided labor and services. Accordingly, such wages and compensation are the property of Plaintiff and not Defendant. 19. Defendant knowingly and intei,tionally failed to pay Plaintiff these wages. Plaintiff is entitled to immediate possession of all amounts converted by Defendant, with interest, as well as any and all profits that Defendant acquired by their unlawful conversion. 20. Defendant's actions constituting conversion were oppressive, malicious, and fraudulent. 21. Plaintiff; requests relief as described below. - _ , P-RAY-ER- ---------- WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendant, jointly and severally, as follows: I. For general damages in excess of $250,000, on each cause of action for which such damages are available; 2. For special damages, according to proof, on each cause of action for which such damages are available; . ,. 3. for exemplary damages in excess of $1,000,000, on each cu use of action for which such damages are available; 4. For reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit incurred herein pursuant to Labor Code * 218.5 and any other relevant provision under California law that provides for attorneys' fees; PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPL1\INT Cose No.: I KC\/340240 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-5 Filed 03/04/19 Page 9 of 10 5. For equitable, declaratory and injunctive relief to the extent available under law; 6. 7. . For statutory penalties to the extent available under law; and For such other and further relief as the Court deems proper and just. Respectfully submitted, Dated: January 29, 2019 THE LEWIS LAW OFFICE, PC By: Drew Lewis Allorney for Plaintiff Plt\lNTIFF"S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Cose No.: IKCVJ40240 -· Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-5 Filed 03/04/19 Page 10 of 10 ATTACHMENT CV-5012 CIVIL LAWSUIT NOTICE Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara CASE NUMBER: _ ___,;,._1_s_c_v_3_40_2_4_o ____ _ 191 North First St.1 San Jose, CA 95113 ,I PLEASE READ THIS ENTIRE FORM PLAINTIFF (the person suing): Within 60 days after filing the lawsuit, you must serve each Defendant with the Complaint, Summons, an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Information Sheei. and a copy of this Civil Lawsuit Notice, and you must file written proof of such service. DEFENDANT (The person sued): You must do each of the following to protect your rights: 1. You must file a written response to the Complaint, using the proper legal form or format, in the Clerk's Office of the Court, within 30 days of the date you were served with the Summons and Complaint. 2. You must serve by mail a copy of your written. response on the Plaintiffs attorney or on the Plaintiff if Plaintiff has no attorney (to "serve by mail" means lo have an adult other than yourself mail a copy); and 3. You must attend the first Case Management Conference. Warning: If you, as the Defendant, do not follow these instructions, you may automatically lose this case. RULES AND FORMS: You must follow the California Rules of Court and lhe Superior Court of California, County of <_CountyName_> Local Civil Rules and use proper forms. You can obtain legal information, view the rules and receive forms, free of charge, from the Self-Help Center at 201 North First Street, San Jose (408-882-2900 x-2926). 0 Stale Rules and Judicial Council Forms: www.courtinfo.ca.gov/forms and www.courtinfo.ca.gov/rules . • Local Rules and Forms: http://www.sccsuperiorcourt.org/civil/rule1 loc.htm CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE (CMCJ: You must meet with the other parties and discuss the case, in person or by telephone at least 30 calendar days before the CMC. You must also fill out, file and serve a Case Management Statement -(Judicial Council form CM-110) at least ·15 calendar days before the CMC. You or your attorney must appear at the CMC. You may ask to appear by telephone - see Local Civil Rule 8. Kirwan, Peter Your Case Management Judge is: _____________ Department: ______ _ The 1 11 CMC is scheduled for: (Completed by Clerk of Court) Date: 04/09/19 Time: 3:00 pm in Department: ___ 1_9 __ _ The next CMC is scheduled for: (Completed by party if the 1s1 CMC was continued or has passed) Date: Time: in Department: ----- ------ ------- ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADRJ: If all parties have appeared and flied a completed ADR Stipulation Form (local form CV-5008) at least 15 days before the CMC, the Court will cancel the CMC and mail notice of an AOR Status Conference. Visit the Court's website at VN./w.sccsuperiorcourt.org/civil/ADR/ or call the ADR Administrator (408-882-2100 x-2530) for a !isl of ADR providers and their qualifications, services, and fees. WARNING: Sanctions may be imposed if you do not follow the California Rules of Court or the Local Rules of Court. CV,50,2 REV 06101116 CIVIL LAWSUIT NOTICE Pago 1 of 1 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-6 Filed 03/04/19 Page 1 of 3 Exhibit 6 l - | L { t . i Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-6 Filed 03/04/19 Page 2 of 3 0. CT Corporation Service of Process Transmittal 01/31/2019 CT Log Number 534837361 TO: Registered Agent Department Business Filings Incorporated (Recipient Account Only) 8020 Excelsior Dr Ste 200 Madison, WI 53717-1998 RE: Process Served in California FOR: AS Solution North America, Inc. (Domestic State: GA) ENCLOSED ARE COPIES OF LEGAL PROCESS RECEIVED BY THE STATUTORY AGENT OF THE ABOVE COMPANY AS FOLLOWS: TITLE OF ACTION: DOCUMENT(S) SERVED: COURT/AGENCY: NATURE OF ACTION: ON WHOM PROCESS WAS SERVED: DATE AND HOUR OF SERVICE: JURISDICTION SERVED APPEARANCE OR ANSWER DUE: . ATTORNEY(S) / SENDER(S): REMARKS: ACTION ITEMS: SIGNED: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE: STEVEN HELTON, PLTF. vs. AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC., ETC., ET AL., DFTS. COMPLAINT, NOTICE Santa Clara County - Superior Court - San Jose, CA Case# 18CV340240 Employee Litigation - FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Business Filings Incorporated, Sacramento, CA By Process Server on 01/31/2019 at 15: 34 California WITHIN 30 DAYS Drew Lewis THE LEWIS LAW OFFICE, PC 1100 Alma Suite 209 Menlo Park, CA 94025 650-665-9000 The document(s) received have been modified to reflect the name of the entity being served. CT has retained the current log, Retain Date: 01/31/2019, Expected Purge Date: 02/05/2019 Image SOP Email Notification, Registered Agent Department <;tsop@bizfilings.com Business Filings Incorporated 818 West Seventh Street Los Angeles, CA 90017 213-337-4615 Page 1 of 2 / RM Information displayed on this transmittal is for CT Corporation's record keeping purposes only and is provided to the recipient for quick reference. This information does not constitute a legal opinion as to the nature of action, the amount of damages, the answer date, or any information contained in the documents themselves. Recipient is responsible for Interpreting said documents and for taking appropriate action. Signatures on certified mail receipts confirm receipt of package only, not contents. Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-6 Filed 03/04/19 Page 3 of 3 0. CT Corporation TO: Registered Agent Department Business Filings Incorporated (Recipient Account Only) 8020 Excelsior Dr Ste 200 Madison, WI 53717-1998 RE: Process Served in California FOR: AS Solution North America, Inc. (Domestic State: GA) DOCKET HISTORY: DOCUMENT(S) SERVED: Summons, Cover Sheet, Instructions, Complaint DATE AND HOUR OF SERVICE: By Process Server on 12/31/2018 at 14:44 Service of Process Transmittal 01/31/2019 CT Log Number 534837361 TO: CT LOG NUMBERl Registered Agent Department 534657790 Business Filings Incorporated (Recipient Account Only) Page 2 of 2 / RfA information displayed on this transmittal Is for CT Corporation's record keeping purposes only and Is provided to the recipient for quick reference. This Information does not constitute a legal opinion as to the nature of action, the amount of damages, the answer date, or any information contained In the documents themselves. Recipient Is responsible for interpreting said documents and for taking appropriate action. Signatures on certified mail receipts confirm receipt of package only, not contents. Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-7 Filed 03/04/19 Page 1 of 9 Exhibit 7 0..0 -JO -' ID .:- ww ,i- z!::..-u,:, V :C en 'Y 0.. ·N -��� t- ir: N :c Q 0) !:!! z <( woo _, (I) • w -'w > W z <( :c - u!!� z :.- <( - >- U> a:- CD.., 18CV340240 Case 5:19-cv-01193 · Doc�e�alrlciJriled .03/04/19 Page 2 .of 9 1 BRYAN CA VE LEIGHTON PAISNER LLP Allison C. Eckstrom, CA Bar No. 217255 2 Michael E. Olsen, CA Bar No. 307358 . 3 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1500 Irvine, CA 92612-4414 4 Telephone: (949) 223-7000 Facsimile: (949) 223-7100 Attorneys for Defendant 6 AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC. 7 Electronically Filed by Superior Court of CA, · County of Santa Clara, on 2/13/2019 12:00 AM Reviewed By: V. Taylor Case #18CV34024_0 Envelope: 2502380 8 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 10 11 12 13 14 15 . 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26" 27 28 STEVEN HELTON, · Plaintiff, v. AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC., a Georgia corporation, and DOES 1-50, · inclusive, Defendants. 12489176.1 1 Case No.: 18CV340240 DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC.'s· ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Date Action Filed: December 28, 2018 V. T ylor DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC.'S ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT . i I I I 1 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-7 Filed 03/04/19 Page 3 of 9 Defendant AS Solution North America, Inc. ("Defendant") _hereby responds to the 2 allegations contained in the First Amended Complaint ("Complaint") filed by Plaintiff Steyen 3 Helton ("Plaintiff') as follows: 4 5 GENERAL DENIAL Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 43 l .30(d), Defendant denies generally and 6 specifically each and every allegation contained in the Complaint. Defendant further denies that 7 Plaintiff has been injured or damaged in any manner or amount or is entitled to any relief of any 8 kind. 9 10 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Defendant has not completed its investigation of the facts of this case, has not completed �� 11 discovery in this matter; and has not completed its preparation for trial. The-affirmative defenses 0: � UJ UJ ... � 3; 12 asserted herein are based on Defendant's knowledge, information, and belief at this time, and ��� ��� 13 Defendant specifically reserves the right to modify, amend, or supplement any affirmative defense :cc "' � z <( � g O 14 contained herein at any time. Without conceding that it bears the burd�n of proof or persuasion as ��� <( :c - � i ; 15 to anyone of them, Defendant alleges the following separate affirmative defenses to the <(� >- U>· o:� "'"' 16 Complaint: 17 18 19 1. FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to State a Claim) The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, fails to state facts sufficient to 20 state a claim on which relief can be granted. 21 22 23 2. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE . (Statute of Limitations) The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred, in whole or in part, by 24 the applicable statute of limitations, including but not limited to California Code of Civil 25 Procedure Sections 337, 338, 339, 340, and 343, California Labor Code Section 200 et. seq., and 26 California Business and Professions Code Section 17208. 27 II 28 Ill 12489 I 76.1 1 DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC. 'S ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT ll.O ..JO ..,.,, 0: w w st Z 1-r u, :iv :::c Cl),. ll. ·N z w r 0 �ID 1-0: N :co "' �z< woo ..,., w -' u.i > W z < :c - oo> - 0: z::l: - -"' ·o: r Ill<'> 1 2 3 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-7 Filed 03/04/19 Page 4 of 9 3. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Failure to Exhaust Administrativ_e Remedies) Plaintiff has failed to exhaust remedies available under statutes, regulations, rules 4 and procedures relating to the matters alleged in the Complaint, and heis barred by reason of his 5 failure to do so. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 4. . ' FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Laches) The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred, in whole- or in part, because Plaintiff failed to raise his alleged claims in a timely fashion. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Waiver, Estoppel, and Consent) 5. The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred, in whole or in prui, by the doctrines of waiver, estoppel and consent. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Unclean Hands) 6. The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred, in whole or in part, by 17 the doctrine of unclean hands. 18 19 20 7. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Accord and Satisfaction) The Complaint, and each cause of action therein,' is barred, in whole or in part, by 21 the doctrine of accord and satisfaction. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Release) 22 23 24 8. The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred, in whole or in part, by 25 the doctrine of release. 26 Ill 27 /II 28 12489176.1 2 DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC. 'S ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT IL o ..JO -'"' "'� ww .., z!::.- ., ::> .... - W z < :c - u �;;; z::i! - <� >- Wz < ::c - - o�� z::E - ..:- >- (0 o:- [ll., 1 2 3 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-7 Filed 03/04/19 Page 6 of 9 FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Willfulness/Good Faith) 14. Defendant did not act willfully, intentionally or with knowledge or reckless 4 disregard as to whether their conduct violated California wage and hour laws. Rather, Defendant 5 acted in good faith and had reasonable gr�unds for believing that its a,ctions were in compliance 6 with California wage and hour laws. 7 8 9 10 11 12 .13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Good-Faith Dispute) 15. The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, fails to state a claim for penalties, including penalties pursuant to Labor Code section 203, because there is a good faith dispute as to Defendant's obligation to pay any wages that may be found to be due. SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Privilege/Legitimate Business Reasons) 16. The Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is ban·ed, in whole or in pati, because Defendant has an honest, good faith belief that all decisions, if any, affecting Plaintiff were made by Defendant solely for legitimate, business-related re_asons that were neither arbitrary, capricious, nor unlawful and were reasonably based upon the facts as Defendant understood them. SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Attorneys' Fees Not Recoverable) 17. Plaintiff is precluded from recovering attorneys' fees from Defendant under applicable provisions of law. EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE .DEFENSE (Due Process) 18. The Complaint is barred to the extent it violates Defendant's rights to due process 25 and equal protection under the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, and other 26 applicable law. 27 II_ 28 // 12489176.1 4 DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC.'S ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 2 3" Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-7 Filed 03/04/19 Page 7 of 9 19. NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Plaintiffs Own Conduct) Plaintiffs claims .are barred, in whole or in part, because, if Plaintiff suffered or 4 sustained any damage, irijury or detriment as alleged in the Complaint, such injury was caused by 5 Plaintiffs own conduct. 6 7 8 TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Offset) 20. If it is determined that Defendant owe monetary damages to Plaintiff, Defendant is 9 entitled to an offset to the extent Plaintiff owes money to Defendant. 10 11 12 21. TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Entitlement to Injunctive Relief) Plaintiff is precluded from recovering injunctive relief, either in whole or in part. 13 Plaintiff has not and cannot allege or prove that irreparable harm will result if injunctive relief is 14 denied. 15 16 17 22. TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (Provided All Meal/Rest Breaks) Any recovery of meal or rest premium payments is barred because Plaintiff was 18 authorized and permitted to take appropriate ineal and rest periods, but freely chose to forego or . 19 waive such meal or rest periods; Defendant did not impede, discourage or dissuade Plaintiff from 20 taking appropriate meal or rest periods. 21 22 23 TWENTY-TIDRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (No Unjust Enrichment) 23. Defendant alleges that Plaintiff has not suffered any losses and Defendant has not 24 been unjustly enriched as a result of any action by Defendants. Plaintiff is therefore not entitled to 25 any disgorgement or restitution. 26 II 27 // 28 // 12489176.1 . 5 DEFENDA�ff AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC.'S ANSWER TO FIR$T AMENDED COMPL�INT 1 2 3 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-7 Filed 03/04/19 Page 8 of 9 _ TWENTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE (All Wages Paid) 24. Defendant alleges that Plaintiff has been paid and/or received all wages due to him 4 by virtue of his employment. 5 6 TWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 25. Defendant alleges that it presently has insuffici�nt knowledge or information on 7 which to form a belief as to whether it may have additional, as yet unstated, defenses available. 8 Defendant reserves herein the right to assert additional defenses in the event discovery or an 9 investigation indicates they would be appropriate. 10 11 12 13 PRAYER WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for judgment as follows: 1. That judgment be enter�d in favor of Defendant and against.Plaintiff; 2. - That Plaintiff takes nothing by his Complaint and·thatthe Complaint herein 14 be dismissed, in its entirety, with prejudice; 15 16 ·3. 4. That Defendant be awarded its costs of suit herein; That Defendant be awarded reasonable attorneys' fees as may be determined 17 by the Court; and 18 19 5. For such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 20 Dated: February 12, 2019 BRYAN CAVE LEIGHTON P AISNER LLP Allison C. Eckstrom 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Michael E. Olsen Michael E. Olsen Attorneys for Defendant AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC. 12489176.1 6 DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC. 'S ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 � " 12 ; :; I- '1 13 - N ll. ::, � .J (I) CD .J • N 14 w �: > a: - 6C� z Z 0 IS < 0 II, ► Ill Ja: .J 6 Ill � 16 u • - w :E z � > 17 CD ! 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:19-cv-01193 Document 1-7 Filed 03/04/19 Page 9 of 9 PROOF OF SERVICE CCP 1013A(3) REVISED 5/1/88 Helton v. AS Solution North America, Inc. (Case No. 18CV340240) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My business address is: 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1500, Irvine, CA 92612-4414. On February· 12, 2019, I served the foregoing documerit(s) described as: DEFENDANT AS SOLUTION NORTH AMERICA, INC.'S ANSWER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT on all interested parties in this action by placing [8l a true copy D the original thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes addressed as follows: Drew Lewis, Esq. THE LEWIS LAW OFFICE, PC 1100 Alma, Suite 209 Menlo ]:>ark, CA 94025 AttQrney for Plaintiff Telephone: 650.665.9000 Email: drew@lewislg.com 0 BY CM/ECF NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC FILING: I caused said document(s) to be . served by means of this Court's electronic transmission of the Notice of Electronic filing through the Court's transmission facilities, to the parties and/or counsel who are registered CM/ECF Users set forth in the service list obtained from this Court. � BY MAIL - As follows: I am "readily familiar" with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with U.S . Postal Service on that same day with postage thereori fully prepaid at Irvin�, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed . invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. D BY FACSIMILE - I caused said document to be transmitted to a facsimile machine maintained by the office of the addressee(s) at the facsimile machine number(s) indicated. Said facsimile number(s) are the most recent numbers appearing on documents filed and served by the addressee(s). I received electronic confirmation from the facsimile machine that said document was successfully transmitted without en-or. · . D BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY - Depositing the above document(s) in a box or other facility regularly maintained by FedEx in an envelope or package designated by FedEx with delivery fees paid or provided for. 0 BY PERSONAL DELIVERY - I caused such envelope to be hand delivered to the offices of the addressee. D BY EMAIL-I caused a true copy of the foregoing document(s) to be served by electronic email transmission at the time shown on each transmission, to each interested party at the email address shown above. Each transmission was reported as complete and without enor. · C8J STA TE - I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and conect. Executed on February 12, 2019, at Irvine, Californi 12460639.1.1 PROOF OF SERVICE JS-CAND 44 (Rev. 06/17) Page 1 of 3 The JS-CAND 44 civil' cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. Tlis form, approved in its original fonn by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, _is required for the Clerk of Court to initiate the civil docket sheet. (Slifi INSHWC110NS ON NfiXT PAGH OF THIS FORM.) I. (a) PLAINTIFFS Steven Helton DEFENDANTS AS Solution North America, Inc., a Georgia Corporation, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive (b) County of Residence of First Listed Plairtiff (EXCHPTIN U.S. PlAJN11FF CASES) County of Residence ofFirst Listed �fondant (IN U.S. PLAIN11H'CASESONLY) San Mateo NOTE; IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED. (c) · Attorneys (Firm Nam•. Addres , a11tlT•lepho11e N11111b•1) See Attachment I(c) Attorneys (If K11ow11) See Attachment l(c) II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Plac•a11 "X"t11O11e8oxO11/y) Ill. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (l'la,'l!a/1 "X"i11O11e8oxforl'lall11/ff · a11d One Bo.t for Defe11da11I) (For Dil'ersily Cases 0111)1 0 I U.S. Govemmenl PlainlilT O 3 Federal Queslion Cilizen ofThis State PTF DEF PTF DEF lvl I O I Incorporated or Principal Place D 4 0 4 (U.S. Gov•n1111e111 Not a Pal"ly) � of Business In This Slate 0 2 U.S. Government Derendanl 12] 4 Diversity Ci1ize11 or Another Stale D 2 D 2 Incorporaled and Principal Place D S l2J 5 □ 3 D 3 of Business In Anolher Slale D 6 D 6 (flldicale Cilize11shlp of l'al"lle., /11 //em Ill) Cilizen or Subject or a Foreign Counlry Foreign Nalion IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an "X" ill 011• Box O11/y) CONTRACT . - "J)ANJ•:: l,�BOR"·, -... , . . , .. ·. [J PROPER� RIGHTS □□ 401� SAia!� Reapportionmenl D I SO Recovery of D 330 Federal Employers' Injury Producl Liability 710 Jla1r Labor SIBndards Acl 820 Copynghls 4 nlilrust Overpayment Of Lia�ilily D 368 Asbeslos Personal Injury D 720 Labor�anagement D 830 Palen! D 430 Ba�ks and Banking Veteran's Benelils O 340 Manne Product Liability Relations D 83S Patent-Abbrevialed New D 450 Commerce D I 5 I Medicare Act D 345 Marine Product Liabilily _0,,:,P�RSONA.k �.ROl'taty·_; ·. D 740 Railway Labor Acl Dnig Applicalion O 460 Deportalion 0 152 Recovery or Defaulled O 350 Molor Vehicle O 370 Other Fraud � 751 Family and Medical D 840Tmdemark =, 470 Rackeleer Influenced& Student Loans (Excludes D 35S Molar Vehicle Product D 371 Truth in Lending lvl Leave Act _ . . ' _ _=,-.SOCIAL S&CUIUTY. Com1pl Organizalions- Vetcrans) Liability D 1.c,J 790O1herLaborL1Uga11on D 861 HIA(l39Sff) 0480Consumer Credit □ □ 380 Other Personal Property D . _ O I 53 Recovery of 360 Olher Personal Injury. Damage 791 Employee Retirement D 862 Black Lung (923) 490 Cable/Sat TV Overpaymenl D 362 11 - d- 1 D Income Securilv Act D D .. f V 1 , B Iii Persona _nJury-Me •ca 38SProperty DamagcProduc - . ·:JMMIGRATION. 863 DIWC/DIWW(405(g)) 8S0Secunt1es/Commodi1ies/ 0 e eran s enc I s Malpracllce Liability · - ·· · · -· · 0 . Exchange 0 160 Slockholders' Suils 1-s-�-:::=::::-:-:=-===---,-,===-,=c-==.,.,..,,=..-IO 462 Naturalizalion 864 SSID TIiie XVI D □ 190 O1her Contract ,_ : ,., CIVIL RIGHTS/' ,_ :,-,· · i PRISONER PETltlONS >: Applicalion O 865 RSI (405(g)) □ 890 Olli�r Stalulory Actions □ l 9S Contract Product Liabilily □ 440 Olher Civil Rigl1ts □·' :: :·: HAB.EA$J:ojW,u_$if\\' □ 465 Oilier lmmigralion □FEDERAL TAX surrs □ ::: ; gn . cultural ti c : II □ . 0 441 Voling 463 Alien Delainee Aclions 870 Taxes (U.S. Plain Ii IT or nvironmen a a. ers 196 Franclnse D D Defendanl) 0 89S Freedom oflnfonnalion :REAL.PROPERTY 442 Employment 510 Motions lo Vacale □ Acl □ - 0 . Senlence 871 IRS-111ird Party 26 USC 0 210 Land Condemnalion 443 Housing/ . D 530 General § 7609 896 Arbilralion □ Accommodahons O . . • 220 Foreclosure D . . . . D 899 Adm1111s1rative Procedure D 230 Rent Lease & Ejectmenl 44�1���:�1:!iisabitu,es- . ��:5 -f;��i:t:> �:.. �:::;��:��:Uppeal of D 240 Torts to Land O 446 Amer. w/Disabililies-Other D 540 Mandamus & Olher O 950 Cons1itu1ionali1y of Stale D 245 Tort Product Liabilily D 448 Education D SS0 Civil Rights Statutes D 290 All Olher Real Property D 555 Prison Condition V, ORIGIN (/'lacea11 "X"l11O11eBoxO11/y) 0 I Original 1812 Removed from D 3 D 560 Civil Detainee· Conditions of Confinement D 5 Transferred from O 6 Mullidislricl Proceeding Slale Court Remanded from Appellale Court D 4 Reinslated or Reopened Another Dislrict (.,pacify) Liligalion-Tmnsrer □ 8 Mullidislrict Litigation-Direcl File VI. CAUSE OF Cite the U.S. Civil_ Stalule under which you are filing (Do 1101 c/tej11r/sd/crlo11al sta(l/tes 1111/ess diversity): ACTION 28 U.S.C. 1441(b) . . Brief description of cause: Diversi of Citizenshi VII. REQUESTED IN CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMANDS 1,250,000.00 CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint: COMPLAINT:. UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P . JURY DEMAND: 0 Yes 12] No VIII. RELATED CASE(S) IF ANY (See / 1 .11rucl/011s): · JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER IX. DIVISIONAL ASSIGNMENT (Civil Local Rule 3-2) (Place an "X" In One Box Only) 0 SAN FRANCISCO/OAKLAND !El SAN JOSE O EUREKA-MCKINLEYVILLE DATE March 4, 2019 SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD /s/ Michael E. Olsen Amork•n L Ol 0 - ,( I- a:: -:i:: C Z !2 z g 15bl O ii- .J (IJ ::i bl .J ,( > 1,1 u 16,( :c • U U bl - z � � > 17>- - D: D: CD -Ill - 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PROOF OF SERVICE CCP 1013a(3) (Helton v AS Solution North America, Inc., USDC-Northtwn District, San Jose Division Case No. 5:19-cv-01193-EJD) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My business address is: 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1500, Irvine, CA 92612-4414. On March 13, 2019, I caused the following document(s) described as: AMENDED NOTICE OF STAY OF PROCEEDINGS to be served on all interested parties in this action by placing [X] a true copy [ ] the original thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes addressed as follows: Drew Lewis, Esq. THE LEWIS LAW OFFICE, PC 1100 Alma, Suite 209 Menlo Park, CA 94025 Attorney for Plaintiff Telephone: 650.665.9000 Email: drew@lewislg.com [IZ]] BY MAIL - As follows: I am "readily familiar" with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Irvine, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. [iZl] FEDERAL - I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this Court at whose direction the service was made. USA0l\12544182.l\1085405.000005 PROOF OF SER VICE
