Conference Case ManagementCal. Super. - 6th Dist.October 16, 2019UI$UJN \OOOQON 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 190V356777 Santa Clara - Civil System Sy AEGIS LAW FIRM, PC Electronically Filed SAMUEL A. WONG, State Bar No. 217104 by Superior Court of CA, KASHIF HAQUE, State Bar No. 218672 County of Santa Clara, JESSICA L. CAMPBELL, State BarNo. 280626 on 6/12/2020 5:46 PM SIMON KWAK, State Bar No. 297362 Reviewed By: System System 9811 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 100 case #1 9CV356777 Irvine, California 92618 EnvelOpe: 4452046 Telephone: (949) 379-6250 Facsimile: (949) 379-6251 Email: icampbelléflaegislawfirmcom skwak@aegislawfirm.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Carlos Adalberto Mejia, individually, and 0n behalf of all others similarly situated JAMES G. SCHWARTZ (SBN 069371) jim@j gschwartz.com LAURIE E. YOON (SBN 309379) laurie@cirruslawpc.com CIRRUS LAW, PC 6600 K011 Center Pkwy, Suite 250 Pleasanton, California 94566 Telephone: (925) 463-1073 Facsimile: (925) 463-2937 Attorneys for Defendant J.A. Momaney Services, Inc. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA CARLOS ADALBERTO MEJIA, Case NO- 19CV356777 individually and on behalf of all others _ Similarly situated, Asszgnedfor all purposes t0 Hon. Judge PatriciaM Lucas Plaintiff, Del”- 3 JOINT STATEMENT FOR JUNE 19, 2020, VS' CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE J.A. MOMANEY SERVICES, INC., a Date: June 19, 2020 California Corporation; and DOES 1 Time: 10:00 am. through 20, inclusive, Dept; 3 Defendants. stern JOINT STATEMENT FOR JUNE 19, 2020, CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff Carlos Adalberto Mejia (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant J.A. Momaney Services, Inc. (“Defendant”) (collectively, the “Parties”) submit this Joint Statement in advance 0f the Case Management Conference scheduled for June 19, 2020, as follows: 1. SUMMARY OF PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiff filed this class action lawsuit against Defendant on October 16, 2019. Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint 0n January 24, 2020. The Initial Case Management Conference was held 0n January 31, 2020. At the initial conference, the Court partially lifted the stay 0n discovery as t0 class certification and individual issues and set a hearing 0n a motion for class certification for August 28, 2020. 2. SUMMARY OF CLAIMS a. Plaintiff’s Position: Plaintiff filed this class action lawsuit against Defendant for failing to pay minimum wages, failing to pay overtime wages, failing to provide meal and rest breaks or premiums in lieu thereof, failing t0 provide accurate itemized wage statements, and failing t0 pay all wages upon the separation of employment. Additionally, Plaintiff seeks to recover civil penalties pursuant t0 PAGA. Examples 0f the Violations shown in Plaintiffs records include unpaid time due to time punches rounded in favor 0f the employer, late meal periods, and missed second meal periods. After completing class-related discovery, Plaintiff Will seek to certify the case as a class action. b. Defendant’s Position: Defendant denies all claims alleged by Plaintiff. Plaintiffs timecards and payroll records for the entire employment period of two years show that Plaintiff was paid for the hours he worked as well as any overtime. Plaintiffs records also show that he took his meal and rest breaks Within the statutory time period. Furthermore, Defendant asserts that this should not be a class action lawsuit as the case is brought by one individual Plaintiff against Defendant. Plaintiff cannot meet the adequacy 0f representation, commonality, numerosity, and typicality requirements of Rule 23(a). -1- JOINT STATEMENT FOR JUNE 19, 2020, CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3. STATUS OF DISCOVERY a. Pending Written Discovery With the discovery stay partially lifted, the Parties commenced written discovery and are continuing t0 work through pending written discovery, including interrogatories and requests for production. Plaintiffs initial set 0f discovery sought class members’ contact information, employee job titles, time records, and pay records, as well as Defendant’s policy documents. Defendant responded that it would provide further substantive responses upon entering into a protective order and agreement on the Belaire-West notice process. The Parties have now agreed to a stipulation for protective order, agreed t0 the Belaire-West notice procedures, and is in the process 0f selecting a neutral third party to administer the Belaire-West notice. Plaintiff is waiting for Defendant t0 sign the stipulation for protective order, completion 0f the Belaire- West notice process and Defendant’s further production 0f the requested information/documents. Defendant propounded an initial set 0f special interrogatories, form interrogatories, and requests for production 0f documents. Plaintiff is working on providing responses. b. Protective Order The Parties agreed t0 use a protective order to address any concerns regarding employee privacy once the Belaire Letter has been sent and received by the neutral third party. The Parties submitted the Joint Stipulated Protective Order and are awaiting the Court’s signed order. c. Delays in Conducting Depositions Due t0 C0vid-19 In addition to written discovery, the Parties were in the process of meeting and conferring regarding depositions before the COVID-19 pandemic and stay-in-place orders. As a result, the Parties have not been able to conduct in-person depositions due to the state 0f emergency. The Parties prefer in-person depositions as it will be more efficient and practical given certain circumstances, including, but not limited to, the necessity 0f a translator at Plaintiff’s deposition, the need t0 review documents during depositions, the difficulties t0 be -2- JOINT STATEMENT FOR JUNE 19, 2020, CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 encountered by Plaintiff (or other persons) t0 access and manage remote deposition logistics, and the increased potential for unforeseen delay due to technical issues. The Parties are currently discussing potential dates for Plaintiffs deposition in case the prohibiting factors limiting the ability t0 conduct an in-person deposition are alleviated. Plaintiff will also seek t0 take the deposition(s) 0f Defendant’s persons most knowledgeable, but require Defendant’s further substantive responses and document production (such as contact information, time records, and pay records) t0 conduct the deposition. Due to the unforeseen delays caused primarily by the covid-19 pandemic, the Parties agreed to a continuance of the hearing 0n Plaintiffs motion for class certification. 4. CLASS CERTIFICATION & STIPULATION TO CONTINUE HEARING The Parties submitted a joint stipulation to continue the August 28, 2020, hearing on Plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification set by the Court at the January 31, 2020, Initial Case Management Conference. The Court indicated at the initial conference that it would consider continuing the hearing should there be discovery-related issues. Facts supporting the showing of good cause is set forth in the stipulation. The Parties are agreeable t0 a continuance 0f at least 60 days at this time, but Plaintiff remains cautious that the issue may need to be revisited depending on the progress of discovery. Plaintiff Will be prepared to propose the timing of a further Case Management Conference at the upcoming conference once the issue of the August 28, 2020, hearing is discussed. The Parties seek confirmation at the upcoming Case Management Conference whether the stipulation Will be granted. 5. RELATED LITIGATION The Parties are not aware 0f any related pending litigation. 6. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION a. Plaintiff’s Position: Plaintiff is open t0 early private mediation as long as Defendant is Willing t0 produce adequate information for Plaintiff t0 evaluate the value 0f the case. b. Defendant’s Position: -3- JOINT STATEMENT FOR JUNE 19, 2020, CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Defendant is open t0 discuss various ADR alternatives including early private mediation with the named Plaintiff as soon as dates can be set. 7. MATTERS REQUIRING COURT ACTION The Parties are waiting for the Court t0 review the following submissions: (i) Joint Stipulation t0 Continue August 28, 2020, Hearing Re: Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification; and (ii) Joint Stipulated Protective Order - Confidential Designation Only. Dated: June 12, 2020 AEGIS LAW FIRM, PC By: /s/ Simon Kwak Simon Kwak Attorneys for Plaintiff Carlos Adalberto Mejia Dated: June 12, 2020 CIRRUS LAW, PC By: /s/ James G. Schwartz James G. Schwartz Laurie E. Yoon Attorneys for Defendant J.A. Momaney Services, Inc. -4- JOINT STATEMENT FOR JUNE 19, 2020, CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE \OOOQONUI-PUJNH NNNNNNNNNt-I-Ht-I-Ht-I-Ht- OONQM$UJNHOKOOOQONMJ>WNHO CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, the undersigned, am employed in the County 0f Orange, State 0f California. I am over the age 0f 18 and not a party t0 the within action; am employed with Aegis Law Firm PC and my business address is 9811 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 100, Irvine, California 92618. On June 12, 2020, I served the foregoing document entitled 0 JOINT STATEMENT FOR JUNE 19, 2020, CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE on all the appearing and/or interested parties in this action by placing D the original g a true copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelope(s) addressed as follows: Joshua Brysk Laurie Yoon James G. Schwartz CIRRUS LAW PC 6600 K011 Center Pkwy., Ste. 250 Pleasanton, CA 94566 Telephone: (925) 463-1073 Fax: (925) 463-2937 josh@cirruslawpc.com 1aurie@cirrus1awpc.com 'im ‘ schwartz.com Attorneysfor Defendant: J.A. Momaney Services, Inc.. D (BY MAIL) I am readily familiar With the firm’s practice 0f collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service 0n that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Irvine, California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that 0n motion 0f the party served, service is presumed invalid if postage cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date 0f deposit for mailing this affidavit. (Cal Code Civ. Proc. § 1013(a); Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 5(a); Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 5(0).) D (BY OVERNIGHT MAIL) I am personally and readily familiar with the business practice ofAegis Law Firm PC for collection and processing correspondence for overnight delivery, and I caused such document(s) described herein t0 be deposited for delivery to a facility regularly maintained Federal Express for overnight delivery. (Cal Code Civ. Proc. § 1013(0); Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 5(0).) g (BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION) I caused said document(s) to be served Via electronic transmission Via the above listed email addresses on the date below. (Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1010.6(6); Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 5(b)(2)(E); Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 5(b)(3).) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE \OOOQONUI-PUJNH NNNNNNNNNt-I-Ht-I-Ht-I-Ht- OONQM$UJNHOKOOOQONMJ>WNHO I declare under penalty of peljury under the laws 0f the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed 0n June 12, 2020, at Irvine, California. Mae A ea Drocco -2- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE