Proof of ServiceCal. Super. - 6th Dist.October 16, 2019TO: FILE COPY SUPERIOR COURT OF CAUFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 191 N. FIRST STREET SAN JOSE, CA 95113-1090 Electronical ly Filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 10I29/2019 11:39 AN Reviewed By: R. Walker Case ¹19CV356777 Envelope: 3580655 RE: Meiia v. J.A. Momanev Services. Inc. CASE NUMBER: 19CV356777 ORDER DEEMING CASE COMPLEX AND STAYING DISCOVERY AND RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE WHEREAS, the Complaint was filed by Plaintiff CARLOS ADALBERTO MEJIA (" Plaintiff" ) in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, on October 16, 2019 and assigned to Department 5 (Complex Civil Litigation), the Honorable Thomas E. Kuhnle presiding, pending a ruling on the complexity issue; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: The Court determines that the above-referenced case is COMPLEX within the meaning of California Rules of Court 3400. The matter remains assigned, for all purposes, including discovery and trial, to Department 5 (Complex Civil Litigation), the Honorable Thomas E. Kuhnle presiding. The parties are directed to the Court's local rules and guidelines regarding electronic filing and to the Complex Civil Guidelines, which are available on the Court's website. Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.254, the creation and maintenance of the Master Service List shall be under the auspices of (I) Plaintiff CARLOS ADALBERTO MEJIA, as the first-named party in the Complaint, and (2) the first-named party in each Cross-Complaint, if any. Pursuant to Government Code section 70616(c), each party's complex case fee is due within ten (10) calendar days of this date. Plaintiff shall serve a copy of this Order on all parties forthwith and Ie a proof of service within seven (7) days of service. Any party objecting to the complex designation must file an objection and proof of service within ten (10) days of service of this Order. Any response to the objection must be filed within seven (7) days of service of the objection. The Court will make its ruling on the submitted pleadings. The Case Management Conference remains set for Januarv 31. 2020 at 10:00 am. In Deoartment 5 and all counsel are ordered to attend in person. Counsel for all parfies are ordered to meet and confer in person at least 15 days prior to the First Case Management Conference and discuss the following issues: 1. Issues related to recusal or disqualification; 2. Issues of law that, if considered by the Court, may simplify or further resolution of the case, including issues regarding choice of law; Updated on 3/8/I 8. 3. Appropriate alternative dispute resolution (ADR), for example, mediation, mandatory settlement conference, arbitration, mini-trial; 4. A plan for preservation of evidence and a uniform system for identification of documents throughout the course of this litigation; 5. A plan for document disclosure/production and adcfrlional discovery; which will generally be conducted under court supervision and by court order; 6. Whether it is advisable to address discovery in phases so that information needed to conduct meaningful ADR is obtained early in the case (counsel should consider whether they will stipulated to limited merits discovery in advance of cerhfication proceedings), allowing the option to complete discovery if ADR efforts are unsuccessful; 7. Any issues involving the protection of evidence and confidentiality; 8. The handling of any potential publicity issues; Counsel for Plaintiff is to take the lead in preparing a Joint Case Management Conference Statement to be filed 5 calendars days prior to the First Case Management Conference, and include the following: I. A Statement as to whether additional parties are likely to be added and a proposed date by which all parties must be served: 2. Service lists identifying all primary and secondary counsel, firm names, addresses, telephone numbers, email addresses and fax numbers for all counsel; 3. A description of all discovery completed to date and any outstanding discovery as of the date of the conference; 4. Applicability and enforceability of arbitration clauses, if any; 5. A list of all related litigation pending in other courts, including Federal Court, and a brief description of any such litigation, and a statement as to whether any additional related litigalion is anticipated (CRC 3.300); 6. A description of factual and legal issues- the parties should address any specific contract provisions the interpretation of which may assist in resolution of significant issues in the case; 7. The parties'entative views on an ADR mechanism and how such mechanism might be integrated into the course of the litigation; 8. Whether discovery should be conducted in phases or limited; and if so, the order of phasing or types of limitations of discovery. If this is a class action lawsuit, the parties should address the issue of limited merits discovery in advance of class certification motions. To the extent the parhes are unable to agree on the matters to be addressed in the Joint Case Management Conference Statement, the positions of each party or of various parties should be set forth separately and attached to this report as addenda. The parties are encouraged to propose, either jointly or separately, any approaches to case management they believe will promote the fair and efficient handling of this case. The Court is particularly interested in identifying potentially dispositive or significant threshold issues the early resolution of which may assist in moving the case toward effective ADR and/or a final disposition. STAY ON DISCOVERY AND RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADUNE Pending further order of this Court, the service of discovery and the obligation to respond to any outstanding discovery is stayed. However, Defendant(s) shall file a Notice of Appearance for purposes of identification of counsel and preparation of a service list. The filing of such a Notice of Appearance shall be without prejudice to the later filing of a motion to quash to contest jurisdiction. Parties shall not file or serve responsive pleadings, including answers to the complaint, motions to strike, demurrers, motions for Updated on 3/8/18. change of venue and cross-complaints until a date is set at the First Case Management Conference for such filings and hearings. This Order is issued to assist the Court and the parhes in the management of this "Complex" case through the development of an orderly schedule for briefing and hearings. This Order shall not preclude the parhes from continuing to informally exchange documents that may assist in their initial evaluation of the issues presented in this Case. Plaintiff shall serve a copy of this Order on all the parties in this matter forthwith. SO ORDERED. Signed: 10120I201 0 101 0 AM i+4 Hon. Thomas E. Kuhnle Judge of the Superior Court If you, a parly represented by you, or a witness to be called on behalf of that party need an accommodation under the American with Disabihtles Act, please contact the Court Administrator's office at (408) 882-2700, or use the Court's TDD line, f408) 882-2690 or the Voice/TDD Carifomia Relay Service, (800) 735-2922. Updated on 3/8/18. 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, the undersigned, 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; am employed with Aegis Law Firm PC and my business address is 9811 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 100, Irvine, California 92618. On December 9, 2019, I served the foregoing document entitled ~ ORDER DEEMING CASK COMPLEX AND STAYING DISCOVERY AND RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE on all the appearing and/or interested parties in this action by placing the original H a true copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelope(s) addressed as follows: James G. Schwartz LAW OFFICES OF JAMES G. SCHWARTZ, P.C. 7901 Stoneridge Dr., Suite 401 Pleasanton, CA 94588 Tel.: 925.463.1073 Fax: 925.463.2937 j~im 'gschwartz.corn Attorneysfor Defendant: JA. Momaney Services, Inc.. (BY MAIL) I am readily familiar with the Iirm's pmctice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the 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 ifpostage cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing this aIIIdavit. (Cal Code Civ. Proc. f 1013(a); Fed. R Civ. Proc. 5(a); Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 5(c).) (BY OVKRMGHT 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. tj 1013(c); Fed. R Ct'v. Proc. 5(c).) (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).) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on December 9, 2019, at Irvine, California. An&sr)7troc CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Electronically filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 12/9/2019 11:12 AM Reviewed By:R. Walker Case #19CV356777 Env #3743704