Conference Case ManagementCal. Super. - 6th Dist.October 16, 2019w \DOOQQUI-h 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 3' 25 26 27 28 1QCV356777 Santa Clara - Civil System Sys 7 ' l| F'l dmmmm i'vegflszxsrémzzm,SAMUEL A. WONG, State Bar No. 217104 Count of Santa ClaraKASHIF HAQUE, State Bar No. 218672 on 1/23/2021 11,33 AM’JESSICA L. CAMPBELL, State Bar No. 280626 Reviewed By, S'ystem System9811 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 100 Case #1 9CV3'56777 Irvine, California 9261 8 Envelope: 5741 120 Telephone: (949) 379-6250 Facsimile: (949) 379-6251 Email: cwernet@aegislawfirm.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Carlos Adalberto Mejia, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated STEPHEN M. FUERCH, SBN 65864 J AMES G. SCHWARTZ, SBN 69371 Law Offices of Stephen M. Fuerch A Professional Corporation 7901 Stoneridge Drive, Suite 506 Pleasanton, California 94588 Telephone: (925) 463-2575 Facsimile: (925)847-3079 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, Assignedfor allpurposes to Hon. Judge PatriciaM Lucas Plaintiff, Defl- 3 JOINT STATEMENT FOR FEBRUARY 3,VS' 2021, CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE J.A. MOMANEY SERVICES, INC., a Date: February 3, 2021 California Corporation; and DOES 1 Time: 2:30 pm. through 20, inclusive, Dept: 3 Defendants. tem JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT U) \OOONONKII-P 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 of the Case Management Conference scheduled for February 3, 2021 , as follows: 1. SUMMARY OF PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiff filed this class action lawsuit against Defendant 0n October 16, 2019. Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint on January 24, 2020 adding a representative claim under the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”). The Initial Case Management Conference was held on January 31, 2020. At the initial conference, the Court partially lifted the stay on discovery as to class certification and individual issues and set a hearing on a motion for class certification for August 28, 2020. The parties have submitted multiple requests to continue the class certification deadline due t0 discovery disputes. The hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification is set for March 24, 2021. Given that the parties are discussing mediation, they anticipate submitting another request to continue the Class Certification hearing. 2. SUMMARY OF CLAIMS 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 to provide accurate itemized wage statements, and failing to pay all wages upon the separation of employment. Additionally, Plaintiff seeks to recover civil penalties pursuant to PAGA. Examples of the violations shown in Plaintiff’s records include unpaid time due to time punches rounded in favor of 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. Defendant’s Position: Defendant denies all claims alleged by Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s 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. Plaintiff’s records also show that he took his meal and rest -1- JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT AU.) \OOONQM 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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 Carlos Mejia, at his deposition admitted that, other than his own claims, he has no firsthand knowledge about any other employees that may have any of the alleged claims against Defendant. Plaintiff cannot meet the adequacy of representation, commonality, numerosity, and typicality requirements of Rule 23(a). 3. STATUS OF DISCOVERY a. Pending Written Discovery Plaintiff’s Position: After completing an initial round of written discovery, Plaintiff served a second set of discovery requests. On December 17, 2020, Plaintiff sent a meet and confer letter identifying deficiencies in Defendant’s responses. Defendant needs to produce the "time clock manual" as agreed, and a privilege log justifying its decision to withhold documents in response to certain requests. Plaintiff also requested clarification of a few responses and contact information withheld from the responses. Plaintiff needs this information for the PMK deposition and class certification. Defendant has not responded to the meet and confer letter, aside from continuing the motion to compel deadline. Plaintiff’s current motion to compel deadline is February 26, 2021. Defendant’s Position: Defendant propounded an initial set of special interrogatories, form interrogatories, and requests for production of documents. Plaintiff has now, after a meet and confer conference and with the help of the Court, responded to all of Defendants written discovery requests. Defendant has been working on providing Plaintiff with additional discovery responses. Plaintiffs have proposed that all discovery be put on hold pending mediation. b. Belaire-West Notice The Belaire-West process has been completed. c. Depositions -2- JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT 10 11 12 13 l4 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff’s Position: Plaintiff set the deposition 0f Defendant’s corporate representative for December 9, 2020. Defendant’s counsel cancelled the date due to an illness. The parties re-set the deposition for February 11, 2021. The new deposition date may be postponed if the parties agree to mediate. Defendant’s Position: Defendant has also taken 2 hours of Carlos Mejia’s deposition, with an additional day necessary, but not yet proposed. These depositions may be delayed as the Parties have agreed to go to mediation. Plaintiff has proposed that all discovery be put on hold pending mediation. 4. RELATED LITIGATION The Parties are not aware of any related pending litigation. 5. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION The Parties are discussing private mediation. Defendant requests a demand from Plaintiff prior to mediation. Plaintiff requests updated class member data to calculate potential exposure. Defendant believes that Plaintiff has all the information necessary to make a demand but will discuss with Counsel. Dated: January 29, 2021 AEGIS LAW FIRM, PC gmznw Je€sica L. Campbell Attorneys for Plaintiff Carlos Adalberto Mejia Dated: January 29, 2021 LAW OFFICES OF STEPHEN M. FUERCH Attorneys for efendant J.A. Momaney Services, Inc. -3- JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT \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 January 29, 2021, I served the foregoing document entitled: 0 JOINT STATEMENT FOR FEBRUARY 3, 2021, CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE on all the appearing and/or interested parties in this action by placing D the originalE a true copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelope(s) addressed as follows: James G. Schwartz Stephen M. Fuerch LAW OFFICES OF STEPHEN M. FUERCH 7901 Stoneridge Drive, Suite 506 Pleasanton, California 94588 Telephone: (925) 463-2575 Facsimile: (925) 847-3079 'im ' schwartz.com j gslaw48@gmail.c0m stevenguerchlegalcom colleen@fuerchlegalcom Attorneysfor Defendant: J.A. MOMANEY SERVICES, INC. D (BY MAIL) I am readily familiar With the firm’s practice of 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 on 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 to 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).) X (BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION) I caused said document(s) t0 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).) D (BY FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION) I caused said document(s) t0 be served Via facsimile transmission Via the above listed fax number on the date below. (Cal. Rules 0f Court Rule 2.306(a)) / / / /// 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 January 29, 2021, at Irvine, California. An rocco -2- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE