Removal to Federal Court

Cal. Super. - 6th Dist.January 17, 2020

1 Timothy L. Reed, Bar No. 258034 treed@fordharrison.com 2 Noah M. Woo, Bar No. 311123 nwoo@fordharrison.com 3 FORD & HARRISON LLP 1901 Harrison Street, Suite 1650 4 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: 415-852-6910 5 Facsimile: 415-852-6925 6 Attorneys for Defendants TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. and 7 THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA PAMELA WILLIAMS, an individual, Plaintiff, V. TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC., a corporation; THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a corporation; DOES 1 to 50, Inclusive, Defendants. CASE NO. 20CV362071 DEFENDANTS' NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF AND STATE COURT OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION Complaint Filed: January 17, 2020 FORD & HARRISON LLP CASE No. 20CV362071 ATToRNm AT L•w DEFENDANTS' NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF AND STATE COURT OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION Los APtilC.f.l.ES Electronically Filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 3/3/2020 1:10 PM Reviewed By: R. Tien Case #20CV362071 Envelope: 4113515 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 28 FORD & HARRISON LLP ATTOJtNt:YS AT LAW Los ANCt::l.f.5 TO THE CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AND TO PLAINTIFF PAMELA WILLIAMS AND HER COUNSEL OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendants Tenninix International, Inc. and The Tenninix International Company, Limited Partnership, without waiving any of their rights, removed the above-captioned case from this Court by filing a Notice of Removal with the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), "the State Court shall proceed no further unless the case is remanded." A copy of the Notice of Removal papers is attached as Exhibit A. Date: March 3, 2020 CASE No. 20CV362071 Respectfully submitted, FORD & HARRISON LLP By: "=""'----=-------:------------ Timothy L. Reed Noah M. Woo Attorneys for Defendants TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. and THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP -2- DEFENDANTS' NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF AND STATE COURT OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION EXHIBIT A FORD k HAIRIMN LLP Anmunu Ar Lu» Sun fulcnco Timothy L. Reed, Bar No. 258034 tread fordharrison.com Noah . Woo, BarNo. 31 l 123 nwoo@fordharrison.com FORD & HARRISON LLP 505 Montgomery Sheet, Suite l001 San Francisco, CA 941 ll Tele hone: 4l5-852-6910 Facsnmilc: 415-852-6925 -n Attorneys for Defendants LIMITED PARTNERSHIP WQQOUIAWN ~_‘ -o PAMELA WILLIAMS, an individual, Plaintiff,~- WM V. TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC., a corporation; THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a corporation; DOES l to 50, Inclusive, HM-ou-I- ”QO‘MA Defendants. TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. and THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY, NNNNNNNNH QO‘UIfiWN-‘oo 28 Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT 0F CALIFORNIA Case No. DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE 0F REMOVAL T0 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT 0F CALIFORNIA PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441,AND 1446 (DIVERSITY JURISDICTION) Action Filed: January l7, 2020 .1 _ DEFENDANTS' NOTICE 0F REMOVAL ONQGM&WNH NNNNNNNN------ v-I qauawn-oomqo‘a¢;5:8 28 FORD k HARRISON LLP Aimluzu AI Luv SAM FRANCISCO Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 2 of 9 TO THE CLERK 0F THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT 0F CALIFORNIA: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that defendants TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. and THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (collectively, “Defendants”) file this notice ofremoval pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, I441, and I446. I. INTRODUCTION l. Plaintiff Pamela Williams (“Plaiuu'flfi filed a complaint on January l7, 2020 in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, entitled “Pamela Williams v. Terminix International, Ina, e! aL,” Case No. 20CV362071 (the “State Court Action”). (Declaration of Timothy Reed (“Reed Decl.”) 1| 3.) 2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §l446(a), a true and correct copy of the records, including all process, pleadings, and documents filed and served upon Defendants in this action, is attached to the Declaration of Timothy Road. (Reed Decl. 11 3-5, Exs. A-C.) 3. On February 26, 2020, Defendants filed an Answer with the Clerk of the Superior Conn of California, County of Santa Clara. (Reed Decl. 1 5, Ex. C.) 4. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), the foregoing exhibits constitute all processes, pleadings, and documents filed and served on or received by Defendants in the State Court Action. (Read Decl. 1 6.) ll. NATURE 0F THE SHIT 5. Plaintiff was employed as an outside sales professional from May ll, 2016 to September 13, 2019. (Compl. 1H 26, 37, 62.) The Complaint filed in the State Court Action alleges the following causes of action arising from her employment: (l) sex discrimination in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEM”); (2) age discrimination in violation of FEHA; (3) race discrimination in violation of FEHA; (4) violation of the California Equal Pay Act; (5) retaliation in violation of FEHA; (6) failure to pay wages andlor overtime; (7) failure to provide meal breaks; (8) failure to provide rest breaks; (9) failure to reimburse expenses; (10) failure to provide itemized wage statements; (l l) waiting time penalties; (12) unfair competition; (l3) wrongful termination; and (l4) unlawful retaliation in violation of public policy. By this -2- DEFENDANTs' none: or REMOVAL AWN OWNQM 10 ll 12 13 l4 15 16 l7 18 19 20 2} 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FORD b HARRISON LL? Affl‘lllrl AT LAN SM: flaucnm Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 3 of 9 lawsuit, Plaintifi' seeks general damages, special damages, punitive damages, loss of earnings, back pay, front pay, employee benefits, emotional distess, attomeys’ fees and costs, prejudgment interest, declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and such other relief as the court finds prOpcr. , (Compl. at Prayer for Relief.) III. SIS OR OY IV RSITX JULISDICTIO 6. A federal court has “original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between citizens of difi‘erent states.” 28 U.S.C. §1332(a). “[A]ny civil action brought in a State Court of which the district courts of the United States have original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant.” 28 U.S.C. §l441(a). Therefore, a state court action may be removed if (l) the action is between citizens of different states, and (2) the matter in controversy exceeds the sum of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. Each ofthese requirements is met in this case. A. COMPLETE DIVERSITYOF CITIZENSHIP 7. Plaintiff is a resident of Alameda County, California. (Compl. 1] 1-2.) Therefore, Plaintiff is a citizen ofthe State of California for diversity purposes. 8. “[A] corporation shall be deemed to be a citizen of any State and foreign state by which it has been incorporated and of the State or foreign state where it has its principal place of business.” 28 U.S.C. § l332(c)(l). The citizenship of a partnership is determined by reference to the citizenship of each of its partners. In! 'l Paper Co. v. Denlanann Assocs., H6 F.3d I34, I37 (5th Cir. I997). 9. Terminix lntemational, Inc. is a corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware and its principal place of business is in Tennessee. (Reed Decl. 1 7, Ex. D.) Accordingly, Terminix International, Inc. is a citizen of Delaware and Tennessee for diversity purposes. 10. The Terminix International Company, Limited Partnership has one general partner, Defendant Terminix International, Inc., and one limited partner, ServiceMaster Consumer Services Limited Partnership. (Reed Decl. 1 8, Ex. E.) ServiceMaster Consumer Services Limited Partnership, in tum, has one general and one limited partner. (Reed Decl. 110, Ex. F.) The -3- DEFENDANTS' Moms 0F REMOVAL Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 4 of 9 1 general partner is SMSC Holdco II, Inc., which was incorporated under the laws of the state of 2 Delaware and has its principal place of business in the state of Tennessee. (Reed Deel. 1 10.) 3 Accordingly, SMSC Holdco II, Inc. is a citizen of Delaware and Tennessee. The limited partner in 4 this ServiceMaster Consumer Services Limited Partnership is The ServiceMaster Company, LLC. 5 The Service Master Company, LLC is incorporated in Delaware and has its principal place of 6 business in Tennessee. Therefore , that entity is also a citizen of Delaware and Tennessee for the 7 purposes of assessing diversity. (Reed Deel. 1 10.) 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 11. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1441(b), the citizenship of fictitiously-named "Doe" defendants is to be disregarded for the purposes of removal. 28 U.S.C. § 144l (b); Newcombe v. Adolf Coors Co., 157 F.3d 686, 690 (9th Cir. 1998). 12. Because Plaintiff is a citizen of California and Defendants are citizens of Delaware and Tennessee, complete diversity exists between the parties. B. AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY EXCEEDS $75,000 13. The Complaint does not allege a damages amount as to each claim. Removal is therefore proper if, from the allegations of the Complaint and the Notice of Removal, it is more likely than not that the claims will exceed the jurisdictional minimum of the court. See Sanchez v. Monumental Life Ins. Co., 102 F.3d 398, 404 (9th Cir. 1996). In determining whether the jurisdictional minimum is met, the Court considers all recoverable damages, including emotional distress damages, punitive damages, statutory penalties, and attorneys• fees. White v. FC/ USA, Inc., 319 F.3d 672,674 (5th Cir. 2003); Galt G/Sv. JSS Scandinavia, 142 F.3d 1150, 11S5-56 (9th Cir. 1998); Anthony v. Security Pac. Fin 'I Services, Inc., 75 F .3d 311, 315 (7th Cir. 1996); Scherer v. Equitable Life Assur. Society of the United States, 347 F.3d 394, 399 (2nd Cir. 2003) (noting that amount to consider for jurisdictional purposes is amount put in controversy by the plaintiffs complaint, without regard to subsequently asserted defenses). While Defendants deny any liability to Plaintiff whatsoever, 1 Defendants assert, based on the allegations in the Complaint and FORD & HARRISON 1 Defendants in no way concede that Plaintiff is owed any damages. Further, Defendants do not waive any argument related to Plaintiffs obligation or failure to mitigate lost wages. -4- DEFENDANTS' NOTICE OF REMOVAL 1.LP AffCII.N�, AT I.AW SAN fRAl'Cl!K'O Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 5 of 9 1 Plaintiff's prayer for relief, that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.2 2 14. Plaintifrs hourly rate upon her termination was $ 1 5.60, plus commissions. 3 Conservatively assuming that this case proceeds to trial within one year of being filed, on 4 January 17, 2021, 70 weeks will have passed between Plaintifrs tennination and trial. Assuming 5 that Plaintiff worked 40 hours per week,3 potential lost wages for her tennination-based claims by 6 that date could be at least $43,680 ($15.60 per hour x 40 hours per week x 70 weeks). 7 1 5. Plaintiff also seeks to recover futw-e wages based on alleged unlawful termination. 8 Huck v. Kone, Inc., No. C 1 0-1845 RS, 2011 WL 3 1 1 08, at •4 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 201 1) (holding 9 that because the plaintiff was S2 years old, he could potentially recover 13 years' of lost wages). 10 Although Defendants deny such relief would be appropriate, just two years of front pay would 1 1 equal $64,896 ($1 5.60 per hour x 40 hours per week x 52 weeks per year x 2 years). 12 16. Accordingly, Plaintiff's potential damages for front and back pay alone are at least 13 $108,576, which exceeds the $75,000 requirement. 14 1 7. Plaintiff is also seeking to recover an unspecified amount of damages for 15 emotional distress. The district court decision in Rivera v. Costco Wholesale Corporation, No. C 16 08-02202 CW, 2008 WL 2740399 a t •3-4 (N.D. Cal July 11 , 2008) is instructive on this point. 17 ·There, a plaintiff filed a FEHA wrongful tennination claim, but did not specify the amount sought 18 for emotional distress. The Court held that because recent jury verdicts in similar cases exceeded 19 $200,000, the defendant established that the plaintiff's claim surpassed the $75,000 threshold. The 20 same result is warranted here. 21 18. Plaintiff is also seeking to recover attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to California 22 Government Code Section 12965(b). It is well-settled that when authorized by statute, attorneys' 23 fees are to be included in the calculation of the amount in controversy for purposes of detennining 24 whether the requisite jurisdictional minimum is met. Galt G/S v. JSS Scandinavia, 142 F.3d 1 150, 2S 26 27 28 FORD e, HARRISON LLP AUC-INl'rl Ar LAW SAN fl,01(1..CQ 2 Evidence establishing the amount is required only when the plaintiff contests, or the court questions, the defendant's allegation. Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, S. Ct. 541, S54 (2014); see also Sanchez v. Monumental Life Ins. Co., 102 F.3d 398, 403-04 (9th Cir. 1996). 3 Plaintiff, for her part, maintains that she "consistently" worked more than 40 hours per week. (Complaint, 1 125.) -5- DEFENDANTS' NOTICE OF REMOVAL cooxlamhwni- NNNNNNNN--u-n--u-I---H “QM&WN-OQWQ¢thN-= 28 Fouo a HARRISON LL? A'YOINI” A7 L5" SAN flaunt:- Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 6 of 9 1156 (9th Cir. 1998) (“[W]here an underlying statute authorizes an award of attomeys’ fees, either with mandatory or discretionary language, such few may be included in the amount in controversy“); Brady v. Mercedes-Benz USA, lnc., 243 F.Supp.2d 1004, 1010-11 (ND. Cal. 2002) (in deciding amount in controversy issue, a court may estimate the amount of reasonable attomeys’ fees likely to be recovered by plaintiff if he were to prevail). While Plaintiff‘s attomcys’ fees cannot be precisely calculated farom the face of the Complaint, it is reasonable to assume that the amount of attomeys’ fees Plaintiff could incur in the course of this matter may exceed a damages award. Simmons v. PCR Technolog, 209 F.Supp.2d 1029, 1035 (C.D. Cal. 2002). l9. The Court must also take into account punitive damages for purposes of determining the amount in controversy where such damages are recoverable under state law. Davenport v. Mutual Benefit Health andAccident Ass 'n. 32S F.2d 785, 787 (9th Cir. 1963); Brady, 43 F.Supp.2d at 1009. California law does not provide any specific monetary limit on the amount of punitive damages that may be awarded under Civil Code Section 3294. Boyle v. Lorimar Productions, lnc., l3 F.3d 1357, 1360 (9th Cir. 1994). A punitive damages award may equal as much as four times the amount of the actual damages award. Slate Farm Mutual Auto Ins. Co. v. Campbell, S38 U.S. 408, 42S (2003); see also Simmons v. PCR Technolog, 209 F.Supp.2d 1029 (ND. Cal. 2002) (citing jury verdicts in which the punitive damages awards ranged from $60,000 to S l2! ,000,000). 20. Of note, the amounts discussed above do not account for the damages Plaintiff seeks based on her wage-and-hour claims, including unpaid wages and overtime compensation, meal and rest break premiums, unreimbursed expenses, and statutory penalties.‘ Such damages, as well as potential related attomeys’ fees, are potentially simificant. 21. Plaintiff also seeks open-ended relief as “such other relief as the Court deems pmper.” Although uncertain in amount, this additional damages claim only serves to increase the I ‘ Should Plaintiff dispute that the amount in controversy is not met here, Defendants reserve the right to present evidence concerning Plaintiff‘s wage-related damages in opposing a motion to | remand. -fi- DEFENDMS' nomce 0F REMOVAL ONQOMAUN- Nunnnnnn- ------ uom¢w~-o~o;\lama;5:3 28 Fowl: Human LLP Aflmm RY LAW SM! FIAICIIC“ Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 7 of 9 amount in controversy. See Lewis v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 348 F.Supp.2d 932, 932-934 (W.D. :Tcnn. 2004) (the “open ended” relief sought by plaintiff, who prayed for “judgment to be determined by a jury, for all incidental, consequential, compensatory and punitive damages” established that her case met the amount in controversy requirement even though he pled in the complaint that he did not assert a claim in excess of $75,000.) 22. Defendants deny that Plaintiff‘s claims have any merit. Defendants also deny that Plaintiff suffered any damages. However, when the relief sought (i.e., back pay, front pay. emotional distress damages, attomeys’ fees, punitive damages, and wage-related damages) is taken as a whole, the amount in controversy for Plaintifl‘s claims exceeds the $75,000 jurisdictional requirement, exclusive of interest and costs. 23. Thus, this Court has original jurisdiction over the claims asserted by Plaintiff in this action based on diversity of citizenship jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ l332(a)(l) and 1441(a). 1v. 24. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a), Defendants have attached to this notice and the declaration of Timothy L. Reed all pleadings, process, and orders filed and sewed in the state court action. (Reed Decl. 11 3-5, Exs. A-C.) 25. This Notice of Removal is timely filed in accordance with 28 U.S.C. l446(b), in ‘that it is filed within 30 days after January 28, 2020, 1he first and only date on which each V Defendant was provided with any pleading or other paper in this matter, and this case has been on file for less than one year. See Murphy Bras, Inc. v. Mitchem' Pipe Sm'nging, Ina, 526 U.S. 344, 354 (1999). The 30-day period for removal runs from the date of service of the summons and complaint, as governed by state law. See 1d. Here, the thirtieth day afier January 28, 2020 is February 27, 2020. Accordingly, this Notice of Removal has been timely filed within the time provided by 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b). 26. Defendants will promptly file and serve a notice of removal to the Clerk of Superior Court of California, County ofSanta Clara. (See Reed Decl. 1 ll, Ex. G.) 27. As required by 28 U.S.C. Section 1446(d), Defendants will give notice of this -7- DEFENDAN'rs' NOTICE 0F REMOVAL ONQQM#WN- NNNNNNNN-_‘_F‘H- ”- qou;uN-o~omqmuACN--5 28 Fcloa HARRISON LL? Amuulm A1 Luv snu rnmclsm Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 8 of 9 removal to Plaintiff. (Reed Decl. 1 ll, Ex. G.) V- EM 28. This action was brought and is pending before the Superior Court of California, Santa Clara County. Santa Clara County, California is located within the Northern District of California. Thus, venue is proper because this is the “district and division embracing the place where [Plaintiff‘s] action is pending.” 28 U.S.C. §l44l(a), & 1446(a). 29. Pursuant to Local Rule 3-2(e), this action should be assigned to a judge sitting in the District Court of San Jose, California because it arises in Santa Clara County. VI. CONCLQSION WHEREFORE, Defendants pray that the Court will remove this civil action from the Superior Court of the State of California, Santa Clara County, to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. By removing the action to this Court, Defendants do not waive any defenses, objections, or motions available to it under state or federal law. Dated: February_27, 2020 Respectfully submitted, FORD & HARRISON LLP By: Isl Timothy L Reed Timothy L. Reed Attorneys for Defendants TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. and THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP -8- DEHDANTS‘ NOTICE OF REMOVAL ONN¢MAUJN- NNNNN NN- qmqufi-005333335:8 28 FORD l: HARRISON LLP Affoflllfl A1 LAN SAN Fulmm Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 9 of 9 PROOF 0F SERVICE I, Bridgette C. Burdick, declare: I am a citizen of the United States and employed in Alameda County, California. I am over the age ofeighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled action. My business address is I901 Harrison Street, Suite 1650, Oakland, California 94612. On February 27, 2020, I electronically filed the attached document: DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE 0F REMOVAL T0 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT 0F CALIFORNIA PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. § 1332, I441, AND 1446 (DIVERSITY JU ISDICTION) with the Clerk ofthe court using the CM/ECF system which will then send a notification of such filing to the following: ECF Service List And I hereby do certify that I have mailed by United States Postal Service the document to the following non CM/ECF participants: Non ECF Service List I declare that I am employéd in the office ofa member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. Executed on February 27, 2020, at Oakland, California. ls/Bridgette C. Burdick Bridgette C. Burdick QWQQMA 1o 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FORD t HARRISON Anunmzu M Law Uh Arum u Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 1 of 87 ' Timothy L. Reed, Bar No. 258034 treed@fordharrison.com Noah M. Woo, Bar No. 3| I 123 nwoo@fordharrison.com FORD & HARRISON LLP 505 Montgomery Street, Suite 100l San Francisco, CA 941 ll Telephone: 415-852-6910 Facsimile: 4 l 5-852-6925 Attorneys for Defendants TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. and THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PAMELA WILLIAMS, an individual, Case No. Plaintiff, DECLARATION 0F TIMOTHY L. REED IN SUPPORT 0F DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE v. 0F REMOVAL TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC., a NORTHERN DISTRICT 0F CALIFORNIA corporation; THE TERMINIX PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1441, INTERNATIONAL COMPANY AND 1446 (DIVERSITY JURISDICTION) LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a corporation; DOES l to 50, Inclusive, Defendants. Action Filed: January l7, 2020 DECLARATION OF TIMOTHY L. REED ISO OF DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF REMOVAL 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 1 8 1 9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FORD & HARRISON l..LP Attou,ns AT Law L� A.ienn Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 2 of 87 I, Timothy Reed, declare as follows: I . I am over eighteen years of age, and have personal knowledge of each of the matters set forth below and, if called as a witness, could and would testify competently to each of them under oath. 2. I am an attorney at Ford & Harrison and am attorney of record for Defendants Terminix International, Inc. and The Tenninix International Company Limited Partnership in this case. 3. Plaintiff Pamela Williams ("Plaintiff") filed a Complaint on January 17, 2020, in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, entitled "Pamela Williams v. Terminix International, Inc., et al. ," Case No. 20CV362071. On January 28, 2020, Plaintiff served Defendants with a copy of the Civil Case Cover Sheet, Complaint, Summons, and Civil Lawsuit Notice via personal delivery on Defendants' agent for service of process. Attached hereto as E:xhibit A is a true and correct copy of the Notices of Service of Process provided to Defendants by its agent for service of process, which reflects service of process on January 28, 2020. 4. True and correct copies of the Complaint, Summons, Case Civil Sheet, and Civil Lawsuit Notice are attached hereto as Exhibit B. 5. On February 26, 2020, Defendants filed an Answer with the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara. A true and accurate copy of the Answer that was filed is hereto as Exhibit C. Defendants have not receive an endorsed filed copy. However, Defendants will submit a copy to the Court upon receipt. 6. The foregoing exhibits constitute the documents in Plaintiffs state-court action, including all processes, pleadings, and documents filed and served upon or received by Defendants in the State Court Action. 7. Defendant Tcnninix International, Inc. is a corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware. On February 27, 2020, I accessed the website for the California Secretary of State and conducted a business search for Defendant Terminix International, Inc. Through the Entity Detail Page, I was able to access the Statement of Infonnation filed with the California Secretary of State on February 27, 2020. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and - 2 - DECLARATION OF TIMOTHY L. REED ISO OF DEFENDANTS' NOTICE OF REMOVAL I 2 3 4 s 6 7 8 9 1 0 11 1 2 13 14 15 16 17 1 8 1 9 20 2 1 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 FORD ,C HAUISON LLP Artt.••Nn� Ar LAW LMAr,,cnn Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 3 of 87 correct copy California Secretary of State's Business Search - Entity Detail page for Terminix International, Inc. and the Statement of Information, which reflects the entity's incorporation in Delaware and principal place of business in Tennessee. 8. The Terminix International Company, Limited Partnership has one general partner, Terminix International, Inc., and one limited partner, ServiceMaster Consumer Services Limited Partnership. On February 27, 2020, I accessed the website for the California Secretary of State and conducted a business search for The Terminix International Company, Limited Partnership. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of the California Secretary of State's Business Search Entity Detail page for Terrninix International Company, Limited Partnership and the Amendment to Application for Registeration as a Foreign Limited Partnership, which reflects the entity's incorporation in Delaware and principal place of business in Tennessee. 9. ServiceMaster Consumer Services Limited Partnership is incorporated in Delaware and has its principal place of business in Tennessee. Attached hereto as Exhibit F is a true and correct copy of the the California Secretary of State's Business Search - Entity Detail page for ServiceMaster Consumer Services Limited Partnership and the Amendment to Application for Registcration as a Foreign Limited Partnership, which reflects the entitis incorporation in Delaware and principal place of business in Tennessee. 1 0. ServiceMaster Consumer Services Limited Partnership, in tum, has one general and one limited partner. The general partner is SMSC Holdco II, Inc., which was incorporated under the laws of the state of Delaware and has its principal place of business in the state of Tennessee. Accordingly, SMSC Holdco II, Inc. is a citizen of Delaware and Tennessee. The limited partner in this ServiceMaster Consumer Services Limited Partnership is The ServiceMaster Company, LLC. The Service Master Company, LLC is incorporated in Delaware and has its principal palce of business in Tennessee. Therefore , that entity is also a citizen of Delaware and Tennessee for the purposes of assessing diversity. 1 1 . Defendants will promptly notify Plaintiff and the Clerk of the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, that the case has been removed. A true and accurate copy of the notice to be mailed and served are attached hereto as Exhibit G. - 3 - DECLARATION OF TIMOTHY L. REED ISO OF DEFENDANTS' NOTICE OF REMOVAL Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 4 of 87 l 12. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America and the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 27 day of February 2020, in San Francisco, California. ls/ Timothy 1,. Reed TIMOTHY L. REED 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l0 ll 12 l3 l4 l5 l6 l7 18 l9 20 2| 22 23 24 25 26 r 27 28 mm “‘Lfyfimm _ 4 _ DECLARATION 0F nMOTHv L. REED aso 0F Anon": AI Luv DEFENDANTS' NOTICE OF REMOVAL Los Armin: Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 5 of 87 EXHIBIT A Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 6 of 87 ®· CT Corporation TO: Stacy Davis, Al·-4007 ServiceMaster 150 Peabody Place Memphis, TN 38103 ·3728 Service af Process Transmittal 01 /28/2020 CT Log Number 537080604 RI!: Proce .. Served In Callfornl■ FOR: The Terminlx lntemaUonal Company Lfmited Partnership (Domestic State: DE) ENCLO■ED Altl! COPIU o, Ll!-L PIIOCI! .. ••cnvED BY THE STATUTORY AOl!NT o, THE ABOVE COMPANY A■ l'DU.DW9: TITLE OF ACTION, DDCUIENT(8J HIIVCD: COURTIAOeNCY1 -TURI! OF ACTION1 ON WHOM PROCI! .. WM ■ERVED; DATI! AND HOUR OF ■EtlVICI!: JURIIDICTION HRYl!D 1 APPEARANCI! Oil ANSWl!R DUi!: ATTORNl!V(aJ I HNDEll(■J: ACTION ITEM■I IIGNl!D, ADDa .. 1 For QIMatlolle: PAMELA WILLIAMS, etc., Pltf. vs. TERMINI)( INTERNATIONAL, INC., etc., et al., Dfts. II To: The Termlnh< International Company Limited Partnership Summons, Complaint, Exhibits Santa Clara County • Superfor Court · San Jose, CA case # 20CVJ62071 Employee L1tl9atlon • Wrongful Termination • 09/1 3/2019 C T Corporation System, Los Angeles, CA By Process Server on 01 /28/2020 at 15: 18 California Within 30 calendar days after this summons and leaal papers are served on you ERIC B. KINGSLEY KINGSLEY & l1 purposes only and 1 provided to the recfpiffll for CIIJlck refllffnCe, This lnfOflllltlon does not �on,tltU(e a lqal opinion u lo the ,..lure of actlan, 1111! lfflOlalt of c!Mlaaes, Ille answer date, or ,ny Information conta.-.cd Ill the doc,unents tflemielves. llecfplent Is responslble for lnte1pretlr11 said docLfflNIS atld for lakinl appropriate action. Slp,atunis on certffted mal rec:elpt5 conlln receipt of � only, /IOl contents. Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 7 of 87 Notice of Service of Process Primary Contact: Stacy Davis Terminix International 150 Peabody Place Memphis, TN 36103-3700 Entity: Termlnlx International, lnc. Entity ID Number 3903008 Entity Served: Terminix lntematlonal, Inc. Title of Action: Pamela Williams vs. Terminix International, Inc Document(s) Type: Summons/Complaint Nature of Action: Discrimination Court/Agency: Santa Clara County Superior Court, CA Case/Reference No: 20CV362071 Jurisdiction served: California Date Served on CSC: 01/28/2020 Answer or Appearance Due: Originally Served On: How Served: Sender Information: 30 Days csc Personal Service Jessica L. Adlcuni 818-990-8300 NJH I ALL Tranamlttal Number: 210500B7 Date ProcHaed: 01/3012020 Information contained on this transmittal form is for record keeping, notification and forwarding the attached document(s). It does not consutute a legal opinion. The recipient is responsible for interpreting the documents and taking appropriate action. To avoid potential delay, please do not send your response to CSC 251 Little Falls Drive, WIimington. Delaware 19808-1674 (888) 690-2882 I sop@cscglobat.com Case 5 :20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 8 of 87 EXHIBIT B i Case 5:20-cv~01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 9 of 87 mica count orcmronm.coumorSANTA CLARA swarms- ] 9| Nonh First Street mummies: I9I North First Street unty of Santa Clara. o 1I17I2020 5:54 PM nmmuonwwvmmnnomzvmmummommmx mmmmmmy Gm 'Jasica L. Adlouni SBN: 32857! KINGSLEY 8L KINGSLEY I6I33 Vcntura Blvd.. Suite 1200, ENCINO. CA 91436 mmmmxsls) 990-8300 mmm s) 990-2903 Electronically FliedAflmvmmxPlaintiff, Panel; Wnuhms ' Superior Court of CA, mmmmflm Jose, 95' l3 viewed By: Patricia Hernandl men. w tow se #ZOCV362071 case Mme: FAME”. w1LL1AMS vs. TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL. mo, EWWIOPO: 3908701 AL. , ‘ CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET complex cage Designation m“mahocv3szo71E Unlimited D Limited D D(Amoum (Amount Counter Joindor demanded demanded ls Flled whh first appearance by delendant WE: exgeeds 825.000) 825.000 or less) (Cal. Rules o! Court. rule 3.402) DE": Items 1-6 belaw must be convicted (see Instructions onme P). 1. Check one box below for Ute case type thatbest decerbes thls case: Auto Ton comet Provlalonally Complex Gm Llllgallon Ame (22) Bm 0| wnnManamy (05) (Cal. Rules oi Court. rule: 3.4004403)Uninsuau mononm (46; Rule 3-740 eoleclbns (09) E Anmmsvrrade regulation (oa) cum moms (personal Inimwmpany ownercumms (09) D conswwon dam (1o; Damm'onfl'm 00"") 7°“ Insurance coverage (18) D Maslofl (40)AM“ (0‘? ozhewomracl (37) Seeurmeswon (23) F‘°°”°'“‘°“"Y (2‘) Realmany avirmmemavrofic Ion (30) "awal mammabe (45) Efliflom malflflflws. hsum merage films ammom me Olhor PuPDIwD (23) condemnation (14) mangled pruvisIonauy comm:em nommorwmomnron wrongfummaa) W39“)D MmMn“!Mm ml“ (o7) D GM![WWM (28) En'Olumflu 0' Jlldflmn‘ cm ngms (03) uuamul notalnu Emma! ol Moment (20) amnion (13) Comm (31) Mbocn-nooua cm: complain: Fraud (1e) WW (32) D Rico (27) Innatectual moody (19) D Owns (38) 0mm comm (nor spewed above) (42)”MW“"WW“ (’5) “um" "M” Mlmunnaou- CMI Potluon Other non-PIIPDIWD ton (35) “5‘“ '°"°““'° (”5) Pammmp and capomxo governance (21) Em oymom Petition re: arbitration award (11) D om“”Wm (mWadwon) (43) < wronglulImam (as) D wm o: mama. (02) E] omerompmmmmS) [j omemddal mum (39; 2. This case LJ Is LKJ Is not complex under rule 3.400 ol the Calllornla Rules of Court. ll the case is complex, niark the factors :equlrlng exceptional judlclal management: a.D Largo number of separately represented peulos b.D abusive motion pmcuce talslng difficult or novel Issues that will be tlme-oonsumlng lo tesoIve c.D Substantial amount o! documentary evldenoe d.D Large numbet of wltnesses ln other ooonlles, states. or countries, or In a lederal court l. D Substantial postjudgment judicial supervlslon Remedles sought (check all thalmpw: aw monetaty b.- nonmonetary: deciarawy or lnjuncflve refuel Number o! causes ol action (spacity):Fourteen (l4) This case D Is ls not a class actlon aulL If there are any known tamed cases. file and serve a notice of related case. (Ynou may use (om: CM-015,) DatezJammy l4. 2020 J fifififimm) ' _ NOTICE o Plaintm must Illa thls cover sheet with the first paper lllod In the action or ptoceedlng (except small dalms cases or cases flled :Jnder [:0 Probam Code. Famlly Code, or Weuare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court. rule 3.230.) Fallure to {Ila may result n sane ons. 0 Flle thls cover shoal In addluon to any cover sheet tequited by local court tuIe. 0 If this case is complex under rule 3.400 et seq. of the Califomla RuIes of Coun. you must some a copy of this cover sheet on all other partlas to the action or proceeding. 0 Unless this ls a conecllons case undel tula 3.740 0t a complex case. this cover sheet wlll be used lot statistical pumoses on . c. Epumt'ue 9’99.“ p OHNEY P e.D Coordlnatlon with related actions pending In one or more oourb Pam lamb.mammow[M.M 1.m7] CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET mt.“- l‘D Ih -0!- _ Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 10 of 87 " INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE COVER SHEET CM‘MO To Plalnlms and 0mm Fillng First Papers. ll you are filing a flrst paper (tor example. a complaint) In a civil case. you must complete and me. along with your flrst paper. the OM! Case ComSheetoontaIned on page 1. Thls Inlormatlon will be used to compile stadsucs about the types and numbers of eases llled. You must complew Items 1 mrough 6 on the sheet. In Item 1. you must check one box tor the case type that best descrlbes me case. ll the case tits both a general and a more specific type ofcase listed in Item 1. check the more specific one. ll the case has multiple causes o! action. check the box that best Indlcates the primary cause o! acfion. To assist you In completing the sheet. examples of the oases that belong under each cane type In Item 1 are provided below. A cover sheet must be filed Only with your Inlual papet. Fallure Io file a cover sheet wlth the flrst paper filed In a cm case may subject a patty. Its counsel. or both to sanctions under rules 2.30 and 3.220 of the Canfomla Rules ol Court. To Panles in Rule 3.740 Collections Cases. A 'oollacuons case” under lule 3.740 Is defined as an action for teoovery ol money owed In a sum stamed to be cerhln that ls not more than 825.000. exclusive ol Interest and anorney's lees. arising lrom a transaction In which prOperty. seMoes. or money was acquired on credlt. A coflections ease does not Include an actlon seeking the following: (1) tort damages. (2) punitive damages. (3) recovety ol teal propetty. (4) recovety o! personal propeny. or (5) a prejudgment wrlt ol attachment. The Identification ol a case as a rule 3.740 collections case on this lorm means that It will be exempt lrom the general time-lorbservice requirements and case management rules. unless a defendant llles a responsive pleading. A tule 3.740 collections case will be subject ho the tequlrements lor service and obmnlng a judgment In tule 3.740. To Pames In Camplex Cases. In complex cases only. partlas must also use me ow Case Cover Sheet to designate whether the case Is complex. It a plalntm believes the case ls complex under rule 3.400 ol the Callfomla Rules ol Conn. this must be Indicated by completing the appropriate boxes In Items 1 and 2. ll a pialntlfl designates a case as complex. the cover sheet must be served with the complaint on all partles to the action. A defendant may me and serve no hut than the Ume ol Its Ills! appearance a )olnder In the plaintlfl's designation. a oounter~deslgnatlon that the case Is not complex. or. ll the plalntm has made no deslgnatlon. a designatlon that the case ls complex. CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES Auto Ton Compact Provhlonally Complex Clvll Llfigatlon (Cal.m (a)_pmall lnlmwpmpeny Bream d ConuaqMauanty (08) RU”. of CW“ Ruin3AM4W) umaggwwngfu' Death Breach ol RemaULem mnmvfiade Regulation (m) Unhsumu Mom (4e) (”me Contract (not unlayrpldctdner Consuucuon Delect (10)m(m,mWu ormfillmam!) Clam Involving Mass Ton (40)mm3W {a Gonlructhan‘anty Bnadrselu Seam!“ Uligallon (28) mfg“; chad;gmmm Plalnufl (nd (mud or mfigence) Envlmmenlalfl’oxic Ton (30)W ammo; Nogllgenl Bmeh o! Conlmdl Insuranpe Courage Gums 0mm Pupotwo (Personal Injmyl Wamnty (mm#0!"ancomm: prom," umowfomw. mam) Other Breach of ContracVWananly acem wed above} (41) ton Couecim (e.g.. money owed. open Entowemam oi Judgml Asbeslos (04) bookcomma) (09) Enbroemenl ol Judgment (20) Ashwos Progeny Damage Coilecllon 030-80110: Plaintm Ahstracl OI Judgment (Out ol Asbestos Pomona Injury: Other Pmmmocy molecueasons County) wm‘gm Duh Ineuranogggveraoe (no!mum cmwlfym). (m... c aPmmmgfi?“ mum) smersmwuagmAmMedical M acuoe 45 "WW0" WIS“ phoeocy Medlflflalpmczbg- owe? COVOMO mummdum) phyflaans a Sumac“; cumcomm (37) PefllloNCeflllIcauon ol Envy ol omer Probssiomr Hem Care comm Fraud MOM”“Um”TamMawm R I P omgcomumm Othocrgnotomemenl ol Judgment Olhet PIIPDIWD 23 0‘ FOPB Premlses ‘ 'Iit’y (0.9.. slip Eminent Donaanverse ”'W‘mmm” CW" comp'l'm andtal) Common (14) R|00(27) _ Intentional aoay wuryrpmwo Wronglul Eviction (33) “ng’mg?WWW (°-o.. mu". vandaflm) Other Red Ptopedy (e.g.. quiet title) (26) “dame Rowom, Intentional Innlwon ol ert ol Possession of Real Pmporty d on Emotional Dims: Momage raucosure '“1“"Mm 'VW" ngm'lmm 3f cumm° Medwflcs Uon cummama s “s mfinzmmflm Other Cameron! Complaint Non-HIPo/wmoumnon raadosum) muffll‘c’gmmm’"?"WWW amass rowumalr auumss UMMIII MIMI (mn-Mnommex) P'aw“ (07) comm (3‘) Miscellaneous: Clvll Pofltlon lalse ms!) flmtcivfl Drugs (so) (inns case involves mega! Mom (21,Warm!) (06) drugs. chad. this"mm“. ownerPeuaon (no: specified Dalmatian (0.9.. slander. Ike!) W gs Commm orRm} m) (‘3) Hm (1°) A8801 Formula (05) wmgue Violence Inieflectud Property (19) Pemon Re: Arbitallon Award (11) Elam Mu“ Prolesslonai Negligence (25] wm o:um; (02) m. Legal Malptacfice WdO-Adninlslmlve Mandamus Em Com Other Professional Malpractice WriI-Mmdamvs on lefled Coun Pom" f0,Nam.CW (”aW °’ "9‘” Cm Mam Pewon tor Relief stem mo Empgmgfn-PWDMD Ton (35) wmoum Umilea Coon ease cm... Wmngml Termnauon (38) om,Jfimmwéfi, om“ cw“ “m“ 0“"EMP‘W ('5) nevtew oi Hunt: carom: Nolloa ol MpuHabor cummu»; moon ' ewwwm CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET W Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 11 of 87 - m SUMMONS mmmmv (CITACION JUDICIAL) ”“mmm‘mm'” NOTICE To DEFENDANT: Tammi): INTERNATION INC. E_F"_ED (AWSO AL DEMANDADO): co ntion' THETEWIX INTERNATIONAL 1 ’1 7/2020 5,54 PMCOMPANY LIMITED PAR S . a corporation: DOES I to 50. Inclusive ' Clerk of Court Superior Court of'CA, You ARE BEING suso 3v PmmnFFmAMELA wu.L1AMS,ao individual. County of Santa Clara (Lo ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE): 20cv352071 Reviewed By: Patricia Hernan+ez Envelope: 3908701a_F----l-- NoncEl You have bun sued. Tho coufl may dead. against you without your bolng head unlou you respond«Mn 30 days. Road nu Inflotmatlon bobw. You haw 30 CALENDAR DAYS aunt thlo summons and legal pupon an mod on you to filo a wralon ruponu at this court and have a copy umd on the plulnfifl. A Ianor ot phone cal will not ptolod you. Your written rnspome must be in props! ||ch loan u you want the court to hear your ass. Thoumay be a noun. loan mat you an use tor yommpomaxou an Md mun com forms and more hbmuon at tho Gamma Count Onllno Solf-Hdp Center (www.mrflnfosmgovlulmm your county law mew. or the commons. mam! you. If you cannot pay them foo. ask the com dork fora loo waive: loan. "you do not fie youmaponu on lime. you may lose tho case by default. und yourwagu. money. and ptoporty may be blown wuhout author warning from tho court. Them amomerlegal mqulmnents. You may wanna al an atlornoy rum away. If you do not know an attomoy, you maymm to call an anomoy rem combo. Ifyou cannot afford an attorney. you my be olgtblo for mo legal services «om a nonpmm legalum: program. You an locate these newton! 9mm at tho Culibmla Legal Services Web ale (wwaMd'pcalronvom). tho Canfomla Count Onllno Soll-Hob Cantor (www.mdnfomaomwnlp). or bymama your local com or county bar anodallon. NOTE: The com has a«Mow lien forwamd foe: and cosh on any selflemem or erbilrallon awatd 0131 0.000 or more In a em ease. Tho cow. Ban must ho paid bokmthu court win dhmlu mo cue. (Avg?! Lo hon domandado. SInoromndo dcntro do 3O dis. lom puodo doddr onw conlm dn onuclmcu woman. Lu Io Infonncddn o con oddn. 119m 3O DIAS DECALMDARIO dospuOs do qua Io magma om dudaa y popohslogdos paramun!“mo nspuom pot09am on ost- com yhm:mo so ontnguo um cow. ll domcndm. Um cut. o una 9am“ Molar!“ no Io paragon. Su Inpuulo porom (lam mo odor on (ammo loyal comcto d dose. mo prouson su cm on Ia com. Es podbh qua hay. un Ionndcdo quo umdpuodo uurpm w mun“. Panda onmhrost'oslomulodos do Io com ym“ Infonmdbn an cl Contra do Ayudo dam Com: do Commie Mwwsuoonomgov). on n Humm- daloyuda cucomm o on Io com qua Io quad. mas coma. a no pund- pogorlo cum domuMId'On. pldc a!ummlo do Ia com Imo Io do un fonnmn‘o do oxonddn duo pngo do cums. s no pmonta su rospuosta a (lmpo. puodopow" o! cuo portmumulrmnfo y lo com Io pom qumrw suddo. damyNam sin mds advomndo. Hayommwums basins. Esncmndoblo quamm. o m cbogodo Inmoma'amom. S! no conoco o un abogodo. puodo 170nm. un «Mdo doman o obogados. SI no puodamm. un ebogado. o:podblo qua wmpla con Io:mum para oblonor confides toga!“ granites do un program. do “MobsMam: 9nm: do lucro. Panda onconwasm gnuposdnam do lam on o! duo web doWM. Lead Sauces. m.tmllbmnrw. on d Contra do Ayuda do Ins Comes do Comm, www.swonomgov) o ponltndos on contodo con Io 00m o o! 0mm do abogodos locales. AWSO: Harley. lo code n'on- domho a ndemarlos coon: y loo codes ammo: porlwwmr un gunman mom cudwlornwpornlan do 810.0006 m4: do valorndudomodem an calm o uno concoslén d9 3mm}. on m also do douche dm. mm we pager o! gunman do la com antes do qua Ia com panda douche"! case. The name and address o! the eoun b: mum” (El nombra y dkeoclén de Ia code 'es): M“ ‘ Superior Court ofCelifomia, County of Santa Clara 20CV362071 l9! North First Street " ' ' - San Jose, California 9 5113 The name. address. and Hephone number of plalnu'fl's attorney. or plalnfiffwilhom an attorney, Is: (El nombm. Ia dlreccfidn y el namero do M61000 do! abogwdo dc! demendanle. o deldomandante qua no (lane ebOOSUO. es). ERIC B. KINGSLEY. Esq., SBN: 185123; JESSICA ADLOUNL Ecq.. SBN: 32857]; KINGSLEY & KINGSLEY. APC 16133 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1200. ENCINO. CA 91436 (818) 990-8300 DATE - Cletk. by Patricla Hernandez . Deputy (Fem) 1/17/2020 5.54 PM Clerk of Court (8mm)__ proo o s o s summons. use roo of (Form (Paa-pruaba dearm esta drawn use e! lormulanb Proof of Service of Summons. (Posmm). NOTICE 'I'O'I'HE PERSON SERVED: You ere aerved 1. D as an Individual demndam. 2.D as the pamon sued undo: the fictitious name of (spedw: 3‘E on hem" o,(W Termlmx International, lnc., a corporation under: ED CCP 415.10 (eocporauon) a ccr= 416.60 (minor)D CCP 416.20 (defunct eorpomfion) D CCP 416.70 (oonservatee)D CCP 416.40 (association or peruaershlp)D CCP 416.90 (euthorlzed poison)E other (5W): 4-D by mono! delivery on (dale): -- - - - - M SUMMONS mammarmgWNOMW . Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 12 of87 ATTACHMENT CV-5012 CIVIL LAWSUIT NOTICE I alpedor Courtof California, County o!Santa Clara - meg NUMBER; zocvsgzon 191 North Fits! St, San José, CA 95113 PLEASE READ THIS ENTIRE FORM PLAINILE (Ira parson suing): \Mithln 60 days after filing the iawsult, you must serve each Defendant wllh the Complaint. Summons, an Altemdlve Dispute Resolution (ADR) lnformafion Sheet, and a copy of thls CM! Lawsuit Notice. and you must flte wrltten proof of such servlce. DEENDAM (The person sued): You must do each ofthe followlng to protect your rights: 1. You must flle a written response lo the Compialnt, using the properlegal (um orformaf, in the Cletk's Office of the Court. withfn 30 days of the date you were sewed with the Summons and Comptalni; 2. You must serve by mail a copy ofyourwrllten responsem the PJalntlff‘s attorney or on the Plaintiff If Plaintlff has no attorney (to “serve by maill' means to have an adult olher than yourself mall a copy); and 3. You must attend the first Case Management Conference. Wamlng: Ifyou. as the Defendant. do notfollow these Instrucfions, you may automah'cally lose this case. .RULES AND FORMS: You must follow the California Rules of Court and the Superior Court of California. County of <_CounlyName_> Local Civil Rules anduse proper forms. You can oblaln legal Information. vlew the rules aid receive toms, free of charge. from the Self~Help Center at 201 North Fist Street. San José (408-882-2900 x-2926). - Stale Rulesand Judicial Councll Forms: www.oouflhfocagov/fows and www.oourmmpggovzmlgg I Local Rules and Forms: hug:l/wwwmugdorcourtprglclvllrulgjIggfllm OON E E C : You must meet with the other patties and discuss the éase. In petson or by telephone at least 30 calendar days befue the CMC. You must also 11H out. file and serve a Case Management Stdement (Judlcial Comcll form CM-110) at least 15 calendar days before the CMC. You oryour attorney must appear at the CMC. You mayaskm appearby telephone - see Local CM! Rule 8. Kulkami, Sunil R 8Your Case ManagementJudge ls: Department: .lhe1“.<.?|.V|_Cisschfidyledfqrz-(0.omplet.ed by.C|erK9f.Court)..... _... . .. .... .._.. ...... Date: 5,19,2020 Time: 231 5pm [n Department:_8 The next CMC ls scheduled for: (Completed by party Iflhe 1“ CMCwas continued or has passed) Date: Time: In Department ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR): If all parties have appealed md filed a completed ADR Stipulation Fem; (Iooal form CV-SOOB) at least 15 days before the CMC. the Court wll] camel lhe CMC and mail notice of an ADR Status Conference. Vlsit lhe Court's website at www.soosugerlorcourtnmlclvllflADRI or call the ADR Admlnlstrator (408-882-2100 x-2530) for a llst of ADR provlders and their qudifications. services. md fees WARNING: Sanctlons may be imposed If you do not follow the Californla Rules of Court or the Loml Rules of Court. cv-smzmomma CIVIL LAWSUIT NOTICE Pug“ on ONQOM#wn- Qauwafloomflaqun-‘o Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 13 of 87 BFILED 1/1 712020 5:54 PM KINGSLEY a KINGSLEY, Apc Clerk 9f Court ERIC B. KINGSLEY, Esq., Cal. Bar No. 185123 Sunenor Court of CA. erfikflngsleykifigsleymm County of Santa Clara 1,: E gauze . STEIN LY.. Esq, Cal. Ba: No. 259230 zocvaszo-n lune mgsleykmssleysom Reviewed By: Patricia Harnandez JESS CA L. ADLOUNI. Esq“ Cal. Bar No. 328571 jwsicaanslcykingsleysom 16133 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1200 Encino, CA 91436 Telephone: (81 8) 990-8300 Fax: (sls) 990-2903 Attorneys for Plaintiff SUPERIOR COURT 0FTHE STATE OFCALIFORNIA FORTHE COUNTYOF SANTA CLARA UNLIMITED JURISDICTION PAMELA WILLIAMS, an individual. CASENO. 20CV362071 PLAINTIFF. COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR: V- l. Discrimination based on Sex (Gov. Code§ [2940(a)) ' EOERIflSoan %TEE¥ENRAJIIS&AL’ INC" a 2. Discrimination based on Age (Gov. Code § I RNATIONAL COMPANY LIMITED 12940, sybd; (a)) PARTNERSHIP, a corporation; DOES 1 to 50, 3. Discrimination based on Race (Gov. Inclusive, Code§ 12940, subd. (a)) 4. Violation of the California Equal Pay Act (Cal. Labor Code § 1197.5 e! seq.) 5. Retaliation (Gov. Code § 12940(h)) 6. Failure to Pay Wages andtor Overtime Under Labor Code §§ 5 l 0, 1194, and l 199 7. Failure to Provide Meal Bmaks Pursuant to Labor Code §§ 226.7 and 512 8. Failure to Provide Rest Breaks Pursuant to Labor Code §§ 226.7 9. Failure to Reimburse Expensw Pursuant to Labor Code 2802 10. Violation of bor Code §226(a) l l. Pcnaltiw Pursuant to Labor Code § 203 12. Unfair Business Practices (Bus. & me. Code §§ 17200 ct seq.) 13. Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy 14. Unlawful Retaliation in Violation of Public Policy DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL DEFENDANTS. UNLIMITED CIVIL - DEMAND OVER 325,000.00 I COMPLAINT fl OWQOMOUN- NNNNNNNNH-IH-I-ou-IH-n-IH 8QGM#WNI-IOOWQGMOWNP° Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 14 of 87 PlaintifiPAMELA WILLIAMS (“Plaintifi'”) complains against Defendants TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. (‘Teminix”), and THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (“Tcrminix”), a corporation; and DOES l through 50 (collectively | “Defcndants"), as follows: I. ENE ALL 1. At all times set forth herein, Plaintiff was and is a msidcnt of Alameda, California. I 2. At all timw set forth herein, Texm'mix was and is, based upon information and belief, a corporation doing business in the State of California. At all relevant times, Tcrminix employed Plaintiff at its businws in the State of California. 3. Plaintiff is unaware of the true names and capacities ofDefendants sued herein as DOES l thmugh 50, inclusive, and therefore sues these Defendants by such fictitious names pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 474. Plaintiffwill amend this Complaint to allege their uuc names and capacities when ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of these fictitiously named defendants is rwponsiblc in some manner for the occumenm herein alleged, and that Plaintifi’s injuries as herein alleged were proximately caused by the aforementioned defendants. 4. Plainfifi‘ is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times herein mentioned each ofthe defendants was the agent and employee ofeach of the remaining defendants I and, in doing the things hcrcinaflcr alleged, was acting within the course and scope ofsuch agency I and employment. 5. At all times set forth herein, Tcrminix has employed five (5) or more employees and is an “employer” as defined by Government Code § 12926(d), and subject to the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”) and other applicable laws. 6. At all times set forth herein, Plaintifl‘was an “employee" of Tenninix, as defined by Government Code § 12926(c). and is a member of a protected class as defined by Govcmment Code § l2926(1) because of her race and sex, as Plaintiff is African American and female. 7. Additionally, at all times set forth herein, Plaintifl' is a member of a protected class I COMPLAINT OWQGMAUN- W Q O u A w N H O W \l Q M A A U N H O Y u... 4.... -. “- Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 15 of 87 as defined by Government Code § [2926(5) and (l) because ofher age, as Plaintifi'has reached her 40th bitthday. 8. From at least four (4) years prior to the filing of this action continuing to the present, Defiendants have had a consistent policy of failing to pay wages and/or oveflime to Plainttifi‘when she works more than eight (8) hours in a day or forty (40) hours in a wedc. or double-time when she works more than twelve (l2) hours in a day. Plaintifl'was consistently required to work off-the-clock hours without compensation. These uncompensated hours caused Plaintifl’s work hours to exceed eight (8) or twelve (12) hours on a given day, andlor forty (40) hours a week, entitling Plaintifi'to overtime wagw which she was consistently denied, in violation ofLabor Code and applicable IWC Wage Orders. Plaintifi‘was not properly compensated for overtime at the appropriate rate ofpay. 9. Upon information and belief, Plaintifl‘ is owed commissions that haw vated and were not paid upon Plaintifi’s termination. 10. From at least four (4) yam prior to the filing of this action and continuing to the pmsent, Defendants have had a consistent policy of fiiling to inform Plaintifi'of her right to take meal periods by way ofa lawful policy, and requiring Plainfifi‘ within the State ofCalifomia to work at least five (5) hours without a meal period and failing to pay her one (l) hour of pay at the employee's regular rate o fcompensaion fo r each workday that the meal period is not provided or provided aflcr five (5) hours, as required by California state wage and hour laws. l l. minutes of time for a meal period each day without determining whether an employee actually took a meal period and whether that meal period was timely and lasted a full thirty minutes. Defendants engaged in a practice of automatically deducting 30 minutes of time. This “auto- deduct” practice resulted in Defendants failing to pay Plaintiff all wages at the appropriate rate for all hours worked. 12. For at lust four (4) yeals prior to 1h: filing of this action and continuing to the present, Defendants have had a consistent policy of failing to inform Plaintifiof her right to take rest periods by way of a lawful policy and of failing to provide Plaintifi within the State of 3 COMPLAINT Further Defendants maintained; policy. Mm.it..ayt9matic_a.l_ly.d-.dumd.;0. - OWQOM&wNI- NNNNNNNNN-n-n-I-n-u-n-n-np-t Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 16 of 87 California paid rest periods ofat least ten (10) minutes per four (4) hours worked or major fraction themof and failing to pay her one (1) hour ofpay at the employee’s regular rate of compensation ' for each workday that the paid rest period was not provided, as required by California state wage and hour laws. 13. For at least four (4) years prior to the filing of this action and continuing to the present, Defendants have failed to reimburse Plaintiff the cost of purchasing specializod tools necessary to perfiorm her job duties. The work performed by Plaintifi necessitath the use of special tools. These tools were not provided by Defendants. As a result, Plaintifipurchascd these tools and Defendants never reimbursed her for the cost. Additionally, Defendants did not adequately reimburse Plaintifl‘for gas and/or mileage. 14. From four (4) years prior to the filing of this action, Defendants have violated and continues to violate the California Equal Pay Act (“CEPA”), Cal. Labor Code §ll97.5. by paying women outside sales professionals less than it pays men for substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, cfi‘on, and responsibility, and performed under similar working conditions. Defendants treat women differently with respect to their compensation and/or terms, conditions, and privileges of employment on the basis of sex. Defendants have implemented compensation policies through which it pays women lws than similarly situated men for substantially similar work and promotes (or gives raisw to) women slower orat lower rates than similarly situated men, even thoughwomen were equally or more qualified to receive a promotion. l5. At all relevant times, Defendants have known or should have known of this pay disparity between its female cmploycw and male employees in outside sales professional positions for substantially similar work, yet Defendants have taken no action to equalize its male and female cmployces’ pay. Dcfcndants’ failure to pay female employees the same compensation paid to , male employees for substantially similar work has been and is willful. l6. Defendants failed to comply with Labor Code § 226(a) by failing to include necessary and required information on wage statements provided to Plaintifi'. Defendants failed to include the proper applicable hourly rates in cfl‘cct during the pay period. l7. For at least three (3) yearsprior to the filing ofthis action continuing to the present, 4 COMPLAINT OWQOMhI-HN NNNNNN NNI-I-Iu-lt-I------ “NOMAUBHOOWQOubth-‘o p.- Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 17 of 87 Defendants have failed to pay all wages due atthe time of termination or resignation to Plaintiff. 18. Plaintiffbrings this action pursuant to Labor Code §§ 203, 226(a), 226.7, 5 l0, 512, l 194, 1197.5, 1199, and 2802; Wage Order 5-2001; and California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 11050, seeking unpaid wages/overtime and commissions, meal and rest period penalties, unreimbursed expenses, other penalties, injunctive and other equitable relief, and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. l9. Plaintiff. pursuant to Business & Professions Code §§ 17200-17208, also seeks injunctive relief, restitution, and disgorgement ofall benefits Defendants enjoyed from its unlawful conduct as described herein. 20. Defendants violate the Unfa‘ir Competition Law (“UCL”), Business & Professions Code §l7200-17208, through its violations of CEPA. Plaintifi‘ also seeks injunctive relief, restitution, and disgorgement of all benefits Defendants enjoyed from its unlawful conduct as described herein. Defendants' business practicw as alleged herein are ofi‘ensive to the established public policies of ensuring women and men arc paid equally for substantially similar work, as ‘ reflected in Labor Code §l 197.5. u. msmcrlo VEN_ 21. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over all causes of action asserted herein pursuant to Article VI, § 10 of the California Constitution and California Code of Civil Procedure § 41 0.10 by virtue ofthe fact that this is a civil action in which the matter in controversy, exclusive ofinterest, exceeds $25,000, and because each cause ofaction asserted arises under the laws of the State of California or is subject to adjudication in the courts ofthe State of California. 22. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because Defendants have caused injuries in the County of Santa Clara and the State of California through their acts, and by their violation ofthe California Government Code, Labor Code. California state common law, and California Business & Professions Code § 17200, er seq. 23. Venue as to each Defendants is proper in this judicial district, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 3 95. Defendants operate within California and does business within Santa Clara 5 COMPLAINT \DOONGUI&UN 10 ll 12 l3 l4 15 l6 17 18 l9 20 21 22 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 18 of 87 County. The unlawful acts alleged herein have a direct effect on Plaintifl‘ within the Slate of California and the c0umy of Santa Clara. 24. This case should be classified as complex according to Rule 3.400 ofthe California Rulw of Court. and assigned to a complex litigation judge and department, as it will involve substantial documentary evidence, a large number of witnesses, and is likely to involve extensive motion practice raising difficult or novel issues that will be time-consuming to resolve and would ‘ roquire substantial postjudgmentjudicial supervision. Ill. 25. On April l9, 2019, Plaintifi‘ dual-filed a timely complaint with the EEOC and California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”) against Terminix, regarding race, age, and sex discrimination and harassment in regards to failure to promote and assignment of territory. (See Exhibit A.) Thereafier. Plaintifi received a Right to Sue notice fi'om DFEH. (See Exhibit B.) On November l9, 2019, Plaintiff filed a timely complaint with the DFEH against Terminix, regarding the factual allegations and causes of action in this Complaint. Thereafier, Plaintifl' received a Right to Sue notice from DFEH. (See Exhibit C.) IV. F UAL 26. Plaintifi' worked as an outside sales profession at Terminix in its Pleasonton and San Jose branch. 27. Plaintiff, at all u'mw pertinent hereto. has been classified as a non-exempt employee by Defendants. Defendants hire employea who work as hourly employees who earn commissions within California. 28. Plaintifiwas regularly required to: a. Work without being paid for all hours at the appropriate overtime rate; b. Work without being paid wages in a timely manner; c. Work without being provided meal periods; d. Work without being provided paid rest periods; and 6 COMPLAINT 1 2 3 Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 19 of 87 e. f. Work without being reimbursed for her out of pocket expenses. Work without beins provided accurate itemized wage statements. 29. On a regular and consistent basis, due to Plaintiff being required to work off�the- 4 clock, Plaintiff was not paid at the proper rate of compensation. Plaintiff was not properly 5 compensated for overtime at the appropriate rate of pay because Defendants failed to compensate 6 her at the appropriate overtime rate when she worked over eight (8) hours in one day or forty ( 40) 7 hours in one week. Additionally, Plaintiff was not properly compensated for double time when 8 Plaintiff worked over twelve (12) hours in one day. 9 30. Upon infonnation and belief, Plaintiff is owed commissions that have vested and 1 0 were not paid upon Plaintiff's termination. 1 1 3 1 . Plaintiff has been forced by Defendants to work over five (S) hours in one day 12 without being provided a thirty (30) minute uninterrupted meal break and not being compensated l 3 one (1) hour of pay at the regular rate of compensation for each workday that a meal period was 14 not provided or provided after five (5) hours, all in violation of California labor laws, regulations. 15 and Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders. Additionally, Defendants failed to inform 16 Plaintiff of her right to take meal periods by way ofa lawful policy. 17 32. Plaintiff has been required to work four hour increments ( or major fractions thereof) 18 without being provided with a ten ( I 0) minute rest period. Additionally, Defendants failed to 19 inform Plaintiff of her right to take rest periods by way of a lawful policy. 20 33. On a regular and consistent basis, Plaintiff has not been properly reimbursed 21 expenses associated with the cost of tools necessary for the completion of her job duties. 22 34. Defendants willfully failed to pay wages and compensation, when Plaintiff was 23 terminated. This failure was wilJful, without legal justification, and interfered with Plaintiff's 24 rights. 2S 35. As a result of the conduct alleged in this complaint, Defendants have engaged in 26 unfair competition and unlawful business practices. 27 36. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff is covered by California Industrial Welfare 28 Commission Occupational Wage Order No. 5-200 I (Title 8 Cal. Code of Regs. § I I 050). 7 COMPLAINT QWQQMANN- MN N N N --I-II-n-_‘_‘_gu-a gqoast’vugo5wuo‘uaunao Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 20 of 87 37. Plaintifiwas hired on or around May ll, 2016. 38. Upon information and belief, the majority of people hired to be outside sales positions at about the same time as her wen men 39. Upon information and belief, during her employment with Defmdant, the few women that were hired as outside saws professionals shortly resigned thereaflcr. 40. At the time of her termination, upon information and belief, there was one other fanale outside sales professional, excluding trainees. Plaintifl‘ was the only female on her work team. 41. 0n or about July 2016, Plaintifi‘ passed an exam necessary to obtain her sales license. However, despite Plaintifl‘s multiple requests and follow-ups Io then sales manager Scott Nash, Defendants delayed payment to the state of California to issue Plaintiff‘s license. 42. 0n or about October 6, 2017, Plaintifl' complained to Human Resources about sex and age discrimination, and the failum to assign her a territory. 43. .Plaintifi‘ was not assigned a sales territory until November 1, 2016. Upon information and belief, her younger, white, male counterparts’ licenses were paid and they were assigned sales territoriw before her. 44. About DeCember 2016, Plaintiffrequested assimment ofa better sales territory that genemed more customer leads. and money. Her request was not granted until a few months later. 4S. Defendants were to provide employees who received their licenses with a company car and jacket. 46. Plaintifl‘ received a different vehicle that did not suit her work needs compared to the nicer, bigger cars that her younger, white, male counterpans, most ofwhom had less tenure than her, received. 47. Plaintifi did not receive a company jacket at the same time as her younger, white, male counterparts. 48. On or about mid-August of201 8, Plaintifi'filed a complaint with Defendants’ ethics hotline regarding Defendants’ delay in replacing her broken Ipad, a necessary item to pcrfiorm her job. I COMPLAINT Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 21 of 87 49. A couple of days later, Plaintiff was issued a written warning that Plaintiff believes 2 is unfounded. 3 50. On or about March 2019, Plaintiff filed a complaint with human resources, · 4 regarding the harassing and discriminatory treatment of her by Steven Hurley, a manager. s 51 . On April 1 5, 2019, Plaintiff received a positive perfonnance review from her 6 manager. 7 52. Approximately April 2019, Ms. Nicholson, who is white and younger than Plaintiff, • 8 and has less experience than Plaintiff, was promoted to manager. Plaintiff was not infonned, as 9 promised, that such a position was open, and so was not given the opportunity to apply for the 10 promotion. 1 1 53. Thereafter, on or about April 18, 2019, Plaintiff filed a complaint with the EEOC 12 for harassment, denial of promotion, and receiving less leads, based on race, sex, and age. 13 54. Thereafter, Managers Mr. Greg Brown and Ms. Nicholson started withholding 14 potential customer leads from Plaintiff, in retaliation for filing the EEOC complaint. 1 5 16 SS. Mr. Brown and Ms. Nicholson both could exercise control over Plaintifrs schedule. 56. Plaintiff received signHicantly less leads and of lesser value than she previously 17 received. Additionally, she received less quality leads than her less experienced, younger, white, 18 male counterparts. The lesser quantity and quality of leads directly affects the amount of money 19 Plaintiff was able to earn. 20 57. Fw1hermore, upon information and belief, Ms. Nicholson would move customer 21 leads from Plaintiff's schedule. 22 58. Plaintiff brought this issue to the attention of Mr. Brown, who failed to remedy the 23 situation. 24 25 59. Defendants interfered with Plaintiff's ability to successfully perform her job. 60. Plaintiff was also in frequent contact with human resources about the issue, from 26 approximately May to September, 2019. 27 61. After Defendants responded to Plaintiff's EEOC complaint, in August 2019, 28 Plaintiff's customer schedule was one of the lowest she had ever had, which she brought to the 9 COMPLAINT WWQGMAWNP WQQU¥WN~OOWQOM§WNHO Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 22 of 87 | - attention ofhuman resourcw. 62. On September 13, 2019, Plainmifiwas terminated by Ms. Nicholson and Mr. Brown. E 63. During Plaintiff’s termination meeting, Mr. Blown stated “this is what you get for complaining to HR." 64. From four (4) years prior to the filing ofthis action, Defendants continued to apply a systematic policy and/or practice of paying its female employew lws than male employees for substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, effort, and tacponsibiliw, and performed under similar working conditions. 65. At all xplevant times, Defendants have known or should have known of the substantial pay disparities between its female employees and male employegs for substantially similar work, yet Defendants have taken no action to equalize men and women’s pay for substantially similar wark. Defendants’ failure to equalize men and women‘s pay for substantially similar work has been and is willful. 66. Because of Defendants' unlawful policies andlor practices, Plaintiff has been denied compensation legally owed to her for work performad and is entitled to wages, interest, liquidated or punitive damages, and attomey’s fees and costs and any other relief allowable by law. V. C E C'I‘I Discrlmlnatlon based on Sex (Gov. Code§ 12940(a)) 67. Plainfifi' repeats. re-allegc, and incomoxate by reference, as thoug-h-set fo;th in tl'ull herein, all previous paragraphs in this Complaint. 68. This action is brought pursuant to the FEHA (Gov. Code § 12900 et seq.), which prohibits employers and/or employew from discriminating against and harming employees on I the basis of sex. 69. At all relevant times, Government Code § 12940(a) was in full force and cfiect, and was binding upon Tenninix, which regularly employed five (5) or more persons, rendering it an “employer” as defined by § 12926“). 10 COMPLAINT Case 5 :20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 23 of 87 70. Plaintiff has exhausted her administrative remedies and has filed claims of 2 discrimination on the basis of sex with the DFEH against Terminix. On April 19, 2019, and 3 November 19. 2019, Plaintiff received a Right to Sue notice from this agency. (See Exhibits B, C). 4 71. Tenninix. through its agents and/or employees. engaged in the practice of unlawful S discrimination on the basis of sex in violation of the FEHA. 6 72. Defendants violated this section by treating Plaintiff less favorabJy than her male 7 coworkers and ultimately terminating her because of her sex. 8 9 73. Plaintiffs protected status under the FEHA is her sex, as Plaintiff is a woman. 74. Plaintiff was subjected to an adverse employment action because of her protected 10 status. Plaintiff was unlawfully fired because she is a woman. 1 1 7S. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has 12 suffered and will continue to suffer damages in an amount within the jurisdiction of this court, the 13 exact amount to be proven at trial. 14 76. As a further direct and legal result of the acts and conduct of Defendant, Plaintiff 15 has been caused to, and did, suffer and continues to suffer extreme and severe anguish, humiliation, 16 emotional distress, nervousness, tension, anxiety, and depression, the extent of which is not fully 17 known at this time, and the amount of damages caused thereby is not yet fully ascertained, the 18 precise amount to be proven at the time of trial. 19 77. The aforementioned acts of Defendants were willful, wanton, malicious, 20 intentional, oppressive, and despicable, and were done in willful and conscious disregard of the 21 rights of Plaintiff, and were done by managerial agents and employees of Defendants, or with the 22 express knowledge, consent, and ratification of managerial employees of Defendants, and 23 thereby justify the awarding of punitive and exemplary damages in an amount to be determined 24 at the time of trial. 25 78. As a further direct and proximate result of Defendants' violation of Government 26 Code § 12940 et seq., as heretofore described, Plaintiff has been compelled to retain the services 27 of counsel in an effort to enforce the tenns and conditions of her employment with Terminix, and 28 has thereby incurred, and will continue to incur legal fees and costs, the full nature and extent of 1 1 COMPLAINT ._. OQOM&UN N NNNNN NI-I flmt-An-nm-u-AH Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 24 of 87 which are presently unknown to Plaintifl' and Plaintifi‘ is, therefore. entitled to reasonable attomey’s fees and costs of suit as provided by Government Code § 12965(b). Vl. E AUSE 0 Disgriminalion based on Age (Gov. Code§ 12940(a)) 79. Plaintifi‘ reallegw and incorporatw all preceding paragraphs, as though set forth in full herein. 80. This action is brought pursuant to the FEHA (Gov. Code § 12900 ct seq.), which prohibits employers andlor employees from discn'minating against and harassing employees on the basis ofaga 8 1. At all relevant times, Govemment Code § 12940 was in full force and effect. and was binding upon Terminix, which tegularly employed five (5) ormore persons, rendering it an “employer" within the meaning of§ 12940(a) and as defined by § 12926(d). 82. Plaintifi‘ has exhausted her administrative remedies and has filed claims of age discrimination with the DFEH against Terminix. 0n April 19, 2019, and November l9, 2019, Plaintifi' received a Right to Sue notice from this agency. (See Exhibits B, C.) 83. Defendant, through its agents and/or employees, engaged in the practice of unlawful discrimination on the basis of age in violation of the FEHA, Government Code § 12940(a). 84. Plaintifl‘ was over forty (40) years old during her time working for Defendant, pursuant to Government Code section 12926(b). 85. Plaintifi'was a qualified employee at the time hex employment was terminated, she was more than 40 years old, and based on information and beliefPlaintiff alleges that she was discriminated against on the basis of her age. 86. On the basis ofthe above, Plaintifi believes and alleges that her age was a motivating factor in Dcfendants‘ termination ofher employment. 87. As a direct and proximate result of Dcfendants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintifi‘ has suffered and will continue to suffer damages in an amount within thejurisdiction ofthis court, the I2 COMPLAINT OWQGM&WN- N N NNNNNI-II-It-n-n---HH-- Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 25 of 87 exact amount to be provcn at trial. 88. As a further direct and legal result ofthe acts and conduct of Defendant, Plaintiff has been caused to, and did, suflicr and continues to suffer extreme and severe anguish, humiliation, emotional distress, nervousness, tension, anxiety, and depression, the extent of which is not fully - known at this time. and the amount of damages caused thereby is not yet fully ascertained, the precise amount to be provcn at the time oftrial. 89. The aforementioned acts of Defendants were willful, wanton, malicious, intentional, oppressive, and despicable, and were done in willful and conscious disregard of the rights ofPlaintifi, and were done by managerial agents and employees of Defendant, or with the express knowledge, consent, and ratification of managerial employees of Defendant, and thereby justify the awarding of punitive and exemplary damages in an amount to be determined at the time of trial. 90. As a further direct and proximate result of Dcfcndants’ violation of Government Codc§ 12940 ct seq., as heretofore described, Plaintiff has been compelled to retain the services ofcounsel in an cfi‘on to enforce the terms and conditions of her employment with Terminix, and has thereby incurred, and will continue to incur legal fees and costs, the full nature and extent of which are presently unknown to Plaintiff and Plaintifl' is, therefore, entitled to reasonable attomcy’s fees and costs of suit as provided by Government Code § 12965(b). VII. QIQN 91. Plaintifi‘ repeats, rc-allcges, and incorporates by reference, as though set forth in full hmin, all previous paragraphs in this Complaint. 92. This action is brougn pursuant to the FEHA (Gov. Code § 12900 ct scq.), which prohibits employers andlor employees from discriminating against and harassing employees on the basis of race. 93. At all relevant times, Government Code § 12940 was in full force and effect, and was binding upon Defendants, which regularly employed five (S) or more persons, rendering it I 3 COMPLAINT OWQOM&UN- NNNNNNNNN---nu-nv-nr- I---- muau#wN-o~omqomaUN-o Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 26 of 87 an “employer" within the meaning of§ 12940(a) and as defined by § 12926(d). 94. Plaintifi' has exhausted her administrative remedies and has filed claims of race discrimination with the DFBH against Terminix. On April l9, 2019, and November 19, 2019, Plaintiffr'eceived a Right to Sue notice from this agency. (See Exhibits B, C.) 95. Defendant, through its agents and/or employees, engaged in the practice of unlawful discrimination on the basis of race in violation of the FEHA, Government Code § l2940(a). 96. Plaintiffs protected status under theFEHA is her race because Plaintiff is Afi'ican American. 97. Defendants knew or perceived Plaintifl'had the aforementioned protected status. 98. Plaintifi', at all times, felt that her managers treated her diffierently. 99. Plaintifi' was qualified to perfonn herjob and performed her work competently for Defendants. 100. Plaimifi was subject to adverse employment actions because of her race. Defendants made decisions adverse to Plaintifi' in regards to the conditions and privileges of her employment, and made decisions that advemly affected Plaintiff‘s compensation. 10 l . Despite Plaintiffs experience, Plaintifi‘was not promoted to manager and received less quality leads. Additionally, Defendants terminated Plaintifi‘. 102. Plaintiff’s race was a motivating factor in Defendants“ aforementioned decisions that were adverse to Plaintiff, including, but not limited to, her termination. 103. Dcfendants’ conduct, as allcged above. is unlawful discrimination based on race as defined by the Government Code and prohibited by FEHA. 104. As a direct and proximate result of Defudants’ unlawful conduct, Plaintifi‘ has mfl‘ered and will continue to suffer damagw in an amount within the jurisdiction of this court, the exact amount to be proven at trial. 105. As a fimher direct and legal result of the ac-ts and conduct of Defendant, Plaintiff has been caused to, and did, sufier and continues to sufl‘er extreme and severe anguish, humiliation, emotional distress. nervousness, tension, anxiety, and depression, the extent ofwhich is not fully l4 COMPLAINT ONQOMODNH NNNNNNNNN-~--an-n-n--.-.H WQGM#UN-°°WQGM&w~-o Case 5:20-cv~01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 27 of 87 known at this time, and the amount of damages caused thereby is not yet fully ascertained, the precise amount to be ptoven at the time oftrial. 106. The aforementioned acts of Defendants were willful, wanton, malicious, intentional, oppressive, and dwpicablc, and were done in willful and conscious disregard ofthe rights of Plaintiff, and were done by managerial agents and employees of Defendant, or with the express knowledge, consent, and ratification ofmanagerial employees ofDefendant, and thereby justify the awarding of punitive and exemplary damages in an amount to be determined at the time of trial. 107. As a funher direct and proximate result of Defendants’ violation of Government Code § 12940 ct scq., as heretofore described, Plaintifi' has been compelled b retain the sewices of counsel in an efiort to enforce the terms and conditions ofher employment with Tenninix. and has thereby incurred, and will continue no incur legal few and costs, the full nature and extent of which are presently unknown to Plaintifi and Plaintifl' is, therefore, entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and costs of suit as provided by Government Code § 12965(b). VIII. FOURTH QAUSE 0F AQHOE Violation of the California Equal Pay Act (Cal. Labor Code § 1197.5 ct seq.) 108. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges, and incorporates by reference, as though set forth in full hemin, all pmvious paragaphs inthis Complaint. 109. Pursuant to California Labor Code § l 197.5(a)(l): “An employer shall not pay any of its employees at wage ram [ms than the rates paid to employees of the opposite sex for substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, eflioxt, and responsibility, and performed under similar working conditions, except where the employer demonstrates: [t]he wage difl’erential is based upon one or more of the following factors: (A) [a] seniority system{,] (B) [a] merit system[,] (C) [a] system that measures earnings by quantity or quality of productionL or] (D) [a] bona fide factor other than sex, such as education, training, or experience.” 110. From four (4) years prior to the filing of this action, Defendants have maintained and continues to maintain a centrally determined and uniformly applied policy and/or practice of l 5 COMPLAINT a \Owflamwa- u-.------p---n-a~ QOM‘NN-O NNNNNNNNN" @QOMAWN-IOO ._. W Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 28 of 87 paying its female employees in outside 3am professional positions less than male employees for substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, efi‘ort, and responsibility, and performed under similar working conditions. as a result of Defendants’ differential assignment of customer leads. l 1 l . As a direct, foreseeable, and proximate result ofthe conduct ofDefendant, Plaintifi has sufitered losses in wages,job benefits, and other employment benefits. 112. At all relevant times, Defendants have known or should have known of the pay disparities between its female employoes and male employees for substantially similar work when viewed as a composite of sfill, efi‘on, and responsibility. and perfonned under similar working ‘ conditions, yet Defendants have taken no action to equalize menandwomen’spay for substantially similar work. Defendants’ failure to equalize men and women's pay for substantially similar work has been and continues to be willful. 113. Plaintifi is entitled to damages in an amount equal to the balance of the wages, ‘ including interest thereon, and an equal amount as liquidated damages. together with the costs of the suit and reasonable attorney fees. (Labor Code §l 197.5(h).) IX. 0 N Retaliation (Gov. Code § 17294000) 114. Plaintiff repeats, re-alleges, and incorporates by reference, as though set forth in full herein. all previous paragraphs in this Complaint. 115. Plaintiffopposed the discrimination and harassment she sufi'nered while employed for Defendant, as described above, including, but not limited to. her numerous complaints to Defendants' Human Resources Department regarding her hostile and discriminatory work environment. 116. Defendants were additionally aware of Plaintifi‘s complaint with the EEOC againsl Defendants regarding its discriminatory actions. 117. As a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff‘s opposition, Defendants took adverse actions against her, including but not limited to terminating Plaintifffor no legitimate reason. 16 mMPLAlNT O“\l0\UI#UNII- N N N-I-‘Hm-u-Iu-n-o-u-n 83‘8338~§oom LA“ Llu .Hur a- Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 71 of 87 PROOF OF SERVICE I, Bridgette C. Burdick, declare: ' I am a citizen of the United_States and employed in Alameda County, I Calgforma. I am over the agepf e1 hteen years and not q part to the w1thm-entltled actlpn. My busmess address ls l9 l Hamson Street, Sunte l 50, Oakland, Calnfomla 9461 2. On February 26, 2020, I served a copy of the w1th1n document(s): DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER TO PLAINTlFF’S COMPLAINT D ELECTRQNlCALLYz. l caused a true and corgect copy thereof to be electromcally filed usmg the Court's Electronic Cour; Fullng ("ECF'D System anq servnce was cpm .l‘eted by electrpnlc means by tran§mltta of a Notice of Electromc lllng on the rqglstered partncnpants ofithe ECF System. I served tho§e .artles who are not registered part1c1pants of the ECF System as m lcated below. BY MAIL: l plac_ed the en_velope for pollection and mailing,' f'ollowmg our orghnary busmess ragtlces. On thg saquag tha; correspondence Is placed forpol ectgon and mgllln , 1t Is eposnted in thp orgimary course of busme.ss w1th the United tages Postal Servuce, 1n a sealed envelope wnth postage fully prepald. D BY OVERNIGHT MAIL: By placing the document(s) listed above in a sealqd Federal Express envelope and affixing a €re-paid air bill ?nddcalysmg the envelope to be delivered to a Fe era Express agent or e wery. Eyic B. Kingsley; Esq. Attorneys f'or Plaintiff Llaqe Katzensteln' L , Esq. PAMELA WILLIAMS Jessnca L. Adloum, s . KINGSLEY & KING EY, APC 16133 Ventura Blvd., Su1te 1200 Encino. CA 91436 Telephpne: 8 1 8) 990.8300 FaCSImlle: ( 18) 990-2903 _ I declare that I _am qmployed in'the office of a member of the State Bar of thlq Court at whose dlrectlon thqservnce was made. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of Amenca that the above ls true and correct. Executed on February 26, 2020, at Oakland, California. gette . ur lc WSACTIVI l.l P IIJI I6|91 PROOF OF SERV1CE Case 5 :20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 72 of 87 EXHIBIT D 2/27/2020 Case 5:20*cv-@1fl8~5é|(@-Wataslaksirfimafiflfimmflfiw Alex Padllla Callfomla Secretary of State _ O‘ Business Search - Entity Detail The Califomla Business Search is updated daily and reflects work processed through Wednesday" February 26. 2020. Please refer to documentW the received dates o! filings currently being processed. The data provided ls not a complete o: certified record o! an entity. Not all Images are available online. 01578382 TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. Registration Date: Jurisdiction: Entity Type: Status: Agent for Service of Process: Entity Address: Entity Mailing Address: 02/04/1987 DELAWARE FOREIGN STOCK ACTIVE P E MPW '.T CE To find the most current California registered Corporate Agent for Service o! Process address and authorized employee(s) Information. click the link above and then select the most current 1505 Certificate. 150 PEABODY PLACE MEMPHIS TN 38103 150 PEABODY PLACE MEMPHIS TN 38103 A Statement o! Information is due EVERY year beginning live months before and through the end o! February. Document Type SI-COMPLETE SI-COMPLETE AMENDED REGISTRATION AMENDED REGISTRATION REGISTRATION [I File Date u PDF 11/19/2019 01/1 7/2019 01I19I1994 11I3OI1 992 02/04/1987 ‘ indicates the Information is not contained in the California Secretary of State's database. . I! the status o! the corporation Is ‘Sunender.’ the agent for service of process is automatically revoked. Please refer to California Corporations Codemm for information relatmg to service upon corporations that have surrendered. o For Information on checking or reserving a name. refertoMAW o I! the image ls not available online for informaion on ordering a copy refer toWW o For Information on ordering certificates. status reports. certified copies o! documents and copies o! documents not currently available In the Business Search or to request a more extensive search for records. refer tommmm htlpsdlbusinesssearchsossa.gov'ICBSIDelail 1|? 2/27/2020 Case 5:20-cv-msmm -Mammalfiksinfiedwmmwamow o For help with searching an entity name. refer toWm. o For descriptions of the various fields and status types. refer toEmmmumm Modify Search New Search Back to Search Results hupszllbusinesssearch.sos.m.gov/CBSIDeIaII _ _ Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 "- .5; tag, California Secretary of State S f S1' Electronic Filin ecretary °, tat? ' g State of Callfornla Corporation - Statement of Information _Entity Name: TER-WNIX INTERNATIONAL. uric. Entity (File) Number: C1 578382 File Date: 11/19/201 9 Entity Type: Corporation Jurisdiction: DELAWARE Document ID: Detailed Flllng Information 1. Entity Name: 2. Business Addresses: a. Street Address of Principal Office in California: b. Mailing Address: c. Street Address of Principal Executive Office: 3. Officers: a. Chief Executive Officer: b. Secretary: GA87632 TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL. INC. 150 Peabody Place Memphis. Tennessee 38103 United States of America 150 Peabody Place Memphis. Tennessee 38103 United States of America Nikhil M Varty 150 Peabody Place Memphis, Tennessee 38103 United States of America Dirk R Gardner 150 Peabody Place Memphis. Tennessee 38103 United States of America Use bizfile.sos.ca.gov for online filings, searches. business record's, and resources. Document ID: GA87632 Officers (cont'd): c. Chief Financial Officer: 4. Director. Number of Vacancies on the Board of Directors: 5. Agent for Service of Process: 6. Type of Business: Tony DiLucente 150 Peabody Place Memphis, Tennessee 38103 United States of America Not Applicable Not Applicable CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY WHICH WILL DO BUSINESS IN CALIFORNIA AS CSC - LAWYERS INCORPORATING Pest Control By signing this document. | certify that the information is true and correct and that | am authorized by California law to sign. Electronic Signature: [Janie Garrett] Use bizffle.sos.ca.gov for online filings. searches, business record's, and resources. Ducument lD: W632 Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 77 of 87 EXHIBIT E 2/27I2020 Case 5:20-cv-eawmm -mmmlmnfiQWMt9min®7 Alex Padilla Callfomla Secretary of State 0‘ Business Search - Entity Detail The Califomla Business Search is updated daily and reflects work processed through Wednesday. February 26. 2020. Please refer todocumentfimlmflmm the received dates of filings currently belng processed. The data provided Is not a complete or certified record of an entity. Not all Images are available onrlne. 198703400009 TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, THE Registration Date: 02I03/1987 Jurisdiction: DELAWARE Entity Type: FOREIGN Status: ACTIVE Agent for Service of Process: C T CORPORATION SYSTEM Entity Address: 860 RIDGE LAKE BL‘.VD. MEMPHIS TN 38120 Entity Malling Address: ' Document Typo fl Filo Date u PDF AMENDMENT 08/18/1998 AMENDMENT 07/29/1993 AMENDMENT 02/16/1993 AMENDMENT 06/10/1987 REGISTRATION 0214'03/1987 ‘ Indicates the information is not contained in the Callfomla Secretary of State‘s database. Note: If the agent for service of process is a corporation. the address of Ihe agent may be requested by ordering a status report. For intonation on daecking or reserving a name, refer tomagnum; If the image is not available onlme. for Information on ordering a copy refer loWm For information on ocdering certificates. status repons. certified copies of documents and copies of documents not currently available in the Business Search or to request a more extensive search for records. refer toMm Basm- For help with searching an entity name. refer tomum For descriptions of the various fields and status types. refer toWW Modfly Search New Search Back to Search Results hltszlbusinessseamhsossa.goviCBS/Detail 1H Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 79 of 87 étate oi QEaIitnmia , fimctarg at5mm m"L“ AMENDMENT T_O APPLICATION FOR REGISTRATION AS A FOREIGN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP IMPORTANT- Read Instructions on back before completing this form Thu Nnondmem la pleasant! forfiling pursuant to Chapter 3. Nficle B. Secfion 15695. California Corporations Code. L SEWMYOF STATE HIE NO. (0mm”Fllumflmmm‘llow-mu‘) 8703400009 _ _ 1 NAM! UNMRmum FORM"MD PARTNERS”ancu’muNW The Taminix International My Limited Partnership a monomeuumaommmum Terminix International Co. , Limited Partnership ¢ manpfimumnnzosmmuAM Effie m_pmmlsm'm»mum A. THE NAME UNDERMCHTMSW" UIIIEDFARMmm808mNWWISWGEDTO: a.m:m o:m2 Foam» omen unmansmp nus aaancmasoasFounTsmom seen nscanoeo mm: nous sure oicom‘iv a imam; ofinc: aonasisuwm-Wmm' "'-"r.cmp-W-Aoom Amssmso Ridge Lake Blvd. “mum m moans.- chIm'EMeI-phis m areoneuno amsnwa- zircon: o.emmvmnmoans amass: acampmusn «ME; Termini): International, Inc- M T5399 Limited Partnersmp moms: 860 Ridge Lake Blvd. mas: ass Ridge Lake Blvd. WAT: Memphis. TN mm 33120 mm: Whig. 'm zvoooe- 33120 --E.esueumm n met: __ ammwmm"mies' mm'ssrvce'osmaceu-ms'aeeu malt “mauve. Io: moms: 51A 5 ANY0m“ms INAWWWRPOMMNSW SEW” 1WTNAJ'TI'EGEMEMLPARMRS DESIRE 1'0 INCLINE IN THIS AMEHDKNT MAY IEWEDONSEPARATE PAGES: umaonueuxrmamD __.7 l. 'I'NE FORIGNm0 PARTNERSHIPMWAIMJSASOFTNE M75mmmu MMOAU‘I‘NOMEOTO EERCISE N3 POWERS Auo PRMLEGES A8 AUHMDPABTREISHP N “'3MI! 87A?!ORm. t . , _ _ - 7. INERIEYOEQAREWT! MAGENERALFARMNYHEAIMm0mPW!” ANDMT“! m SPACEgmmorflmussmmnarmlsmml MANNEEE $1 034 0 O 00 9M FILED miifl‘F‘S‘n‘f‘es WE i umemamgsmmwsme - President a. Reward Aén-“u. m:n-m-WL. AUG I 3 ‘993 NAME r jCTCommie Systemgm no Scum CengalAm mm Suite 400 3mm Smudsutemm I omen. M08105 Case 5 :20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 80 of 87 EXHIBIT F ?127I2020 Case 5:20-CV-91WP6-W9 'WWflFiWQGWEWWMOWT Alex Padllla Eallfqrnla Secretary of State 0‘ Business Search - Entity Detail The California Business Search is updated dally and reflects work processed through Wednesday“ February 26. 2020. Please refer to documentWjor the received dates of filings currently being processed. The data provided ls not a complete or certified record of an entity. Not all Images are available online. 200207800021 SERVICEMASTER CONSUMER SERVICES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP Registration Date: 03/14/2002 Jurisdiction: DELAWARE Entity Type: FOREIGN Status: ACTIVE Agent for Service of Process: CT CORPORATION SYSTEM Entity Address: 860 RIDGE LAKE BLVD. MEMPHIS TN 38120 Entity Malling Address: " Document Type [I Flle Date [I PDF AMENDMENT 02/18/2014 AMENDMENT 0250/2014 REGISTRATION 03/14/2002 ‘ Indicates the Information is not contained In the California Secretary of State‘s database. Note: If the agent for service of process is a corporation. the address of the agent may be requested by ordering a status report. For information on checking or reserving a name. refer toW If the image ls not available onlme. for Information on ordering a copy refer toWm For Information on ordering certificates. status reports. certified copies of documents and copies of documents not currently availablle in the Business Search or to request a more extensive search for records. refer tomm 32mm. For help with searching an entity name. refer toW1. For descriptions of the various fields and status types. refer toMMVAM Modlly Search New Search Back to Search Results httpszl/businesssearch.sos.ee.gov/CBSIDetail m Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 82 of 87. _-..__ _- 354;, Jai’ ., .. State of California - .44”); Secretary of State FILED . Secatary of State State of California Foreign Limited Pgrtnershfp FEB 1 8 2mAmendment t9 Application for Registration A 830.00mm (a mum accompany thll form. ‘CC/ IMPORTANT- Read Instruction: balm compiollng ml. tom. ‘I’hb Spica For FlllngUu Only_ Filo Number Em'ITy" Name (sumacmu‘mmonm ammo”mnnb.) 41. CA Secretary of Stale File Number 2. Name Undet Whlch the Forelgn lelled Putnonhlp Conducts Busjmu 1n Californla 20020780002! ServiceMaster Consume: Services Limited Patuxershiph- ' ‘I‘ r lbms 3 mrough 13: (Complete ONLY Ihe Items In hoamded «added by Ihbmm Mud) additional pagan. lfnocouuy. Any other mailers to ho holodsd may hom onm cunehmonl b Ihlswheat Mymamas are lamented mum byw-rom and made pm o! ml: document)L Entity Name as amended (Comu- uam a um. mum na'ma or memun Izmlua panama» nu chanced In tho melonmam Compton.mm 4 Ir gnome ormlna anmom name hemanb. 800 Inwvcaom.) 3. Name of Foreign lelled Pannorshlp As Amended In the Fovolgn Jurisddlon 4. Aftomato Name (See Inshuctlons before compieung Item 4.) Entity Addresses fl j ‘ 5a. Siren! Address of Ptlncipal Otflce Cfly 8|an 2h Code 5b. Malling Address oi Principal Office, ll dlfierenl (rem llom 5: City State le Code a. Adams ol omca Required In mo Juladlulon o! FumatlonfflEw cny sme Zip Cocou ‘-_-_ Assn! lor Sowlce oi Prtooou a!mo anon! ls an mammal, comma both nam- 7 and a. u Ibo coon: la amm. commie mm 7 and bur mm a blankL 7. Name otAgent lor Setvloe o! Proces- 8. Iran indeuaI. Street Address 9t Agent for Sotvlce ofRoms In CA City Stale le Code ” CA General Paflnor Intomatlon (Now Pannor. Address Chance, Nam. ChanggLandIor Withdrawn Pamrfiz 9. Now Name Address Clly State le Code ' Pm" smcs _Ho|dco u. 1m 860 Ridge Lakemm. Memphis,m 38120 10. Adam! Name Address City State le Code Chance 11; Name From: To: Chung. - 12. \Mlhdrawn Name: _ Name: Patton“) ' j1ForelLlelled Llobllltv Limited PIMhlp q13.U Chad this box If the brolgn llmltod pannamhlp Is a forelm Ilmlted Ilablllgy lmltod perineruhlp. Euocutlon (ma documonl mus! be algnod by cl bu! one consul mar 01 tho foam Wed pnmnhlp. Ii immune! timolun 1pm l; mum. tho Ilunomru my be mode on l1 almom b lhb down“) 14.Ideclara l am tho person who executed lhls Instrument. which execution ls my act and deed. By slgnlng thls document I aflim under penalty o! my that the a ed are lrua.M Thom L. eunpun,w ofsmcs Holdcg u. m9. - up a mp d Genoa! Parlner Type or Prlnt Name ot General Penna! L94 (Rev01mm . 1 i MOVED BY SECRETARY OF STATE":1 -|. I I------.|||.u|a. .a .. . Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 83 of 87 EXHIBIT G 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1| 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Fouo t HARRISON LLP Anolum Av Ln: Ll" ANCEI E1 Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 84 of 87 Timothy L. Reed, Bar No. 258034 trecd@fordharrison.com Noah M. W00, Bar No. 3 1 I 123 nwoo@fordharrison.com FORD & HARRISON LLP 505 Montgomery Street, Suite 1001 San Francisco, CA 941 ll Telephone: 41 5-852-691 0 Facsimile: 415-852-6925 Attorneys for Defendants TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. and THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP SUPERIOR COURT 0F THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY 0F SANTA CLARA PAMELA WILLIAMS, an individual, Plaintiff, v. TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC., a corporation; THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a corporation; DOES 1 to 50, Inclusive, Defendants. r.- _,__ - CASE N0. 20CV362071 DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE T0 PLAINTIFF AND STATE COURT OF REMOVAL 0 F CIVIL ACTION Complaint Filed: January l7. 2020 CASE NO 20CV362071 DEFENDANTS‘ NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF AND STATE COURT OF REMOVAL OF CML ACTION Qwfla‘llAWN-t NNNNNNNND-In-o-n-nr-g-n--p-a-n QOM&WNHOOWQQMAWN-° 28 FORD k HARRISON LLP Anomzvs At Law LM Al(‘okns Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 85 of 87 T0 THE CLERK 0F THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AND T0 PLAINTIFF PAMELA WILLIAMS AND HER COUNSEL OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendants Terminix lntemational, Inc. and The 'l‘erminix lntemational Company, Limited Partnership, without waiving any of their rights, removed the above-captioned case from this Court by filing a Notice of Removal with the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Northem District of California. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), “the State Court shall proceed no further unless the case is remanded.” A copy of the Notice ofRemoval is attached as Exhibit A. Date: Febmaryw27, 2020 Respectfislly submitted, FORD & HARRISON LLP By' Timothy L. Reed Attorneys for Defendants Terminix International, Inc. and The Terminix International Company, Limited Partnership - 2 - Cass N6 zocv’as'z'o'fl DEFENDANTs' NOTICE To PLAINTIFF AND STAIE COURT 0F REMOVAL or cwn. ACTION Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 86 of 87 EXHIBIT A (Omitted) fiooflougww- NNNNNNNN-fl-w--u-I-u-- Qo‘u#wN-oowflauwa_° 28 FORD a HARRISON AY'umus A? l‘aw Sm Fum-Isro Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-1 Filed 02/27/20 Page 87 of 87 PROOF OF SEBVICE l, Bridgette C. Burdick, declare: I am a citizen of the United States and employed in Alameda County, California. l am overthe age of eighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled action. My business address is 1901 Harrison Street, Suite I650, Oakland, California 94612. On February 27, 2020, I electronically filed the attached document: DECLARATION 0F TIMOTHY L. REED IN SUPPORT 0F DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE 0F REMOVAL 1‘0 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT 0F CALIFORNIA PURSUANT 1‘0 28 U.S.C. SECTIONS I332, 1441, AND 1446 (DIVERSITY JURISDICTION) with the Clerk of the court using the CM/ECF system which will then send a notification of such filing to the following: ECF Service List And l hereby do certify that l have mailed by United States Postal Service the document to the following non CM/ECF participants: Non ECF Service List I declare that l am employed in the ofl'lce of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. Executed on February 27, 2020, at Oakland, California. /'s/ Bridgette C. Burdiclt Bridgette C. Burdick Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-2 Filed 02/27/20 Page 1 of 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET The JS-CANDu civil cover then Ind the 'mfioanuion conninedMin neither lace normum: the filin and lgvice orpiadings or oflwtrpmu muind by law,' the Judicial Confum o the Unmd States in September l9 d. is required for due Clark of lS-CANDM (Ru. 01l| 9) ex as prgwded by local mlu ofmn. This tom awsoved in ils on 'ml formCom Io inilme lh: civil docket sheet. (SEEINSTRUCTI ON NEXTP S0Frm RM) l- . . . DEFENDANISfixmmuAMs» an mdw'dual mummnnmomL. Inc. wmammmmm.oommv.Lump unmet; b C {R fie Dc TF3!!! Lind PI ' l'ff AWC Conn dkuidflnc «Finluflednefufllm 1-‘ ) w" PH” 3:. rLIrngr-ram; m ' "‘7 (mugmmnrrcusscum “"‘ NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION cuss. us: me LOCATION or TIE TRACTG LAW INVOLVED. At! TimoIhy z. £££ng 258034) Ind Noah M. Woo (SBN 3|] I23) - 415-852-6910WWI Harrison Shel. Suite [650. Oakland. Califiomia 94612égmm"dramMm;Kingalcy a Kinney. arc . alumnae lam Venus: Blvd. Suizc Izoo Em'm ca 91m II. BASISOFJURISDICTION (Hora an "X" In 0n: laxaw III. CITIZENSHIPOF PRWCIPALFARM (Pun: "X" inmMhfl’ldugfl (FarflwnmCam 0i”) Mm BaxterMadam P‘I’P DEF "F DEF I U.S.(hum! Phimil? 3 Pedal) QMflIGI calinnorThisSmc 1 I Impomodor Princiu l filo: 4 4{usGommummw X “a l “Imam . . Cidun ofMoth: Stu: A 2 2 mu and Principal Flu: 5 x 5 a u.s.oo~uunm Mum X4 mus. cranium Inmm:a “h""a'hm'm‘ ”MWH'"w Ci-imusmea or. - J J romp:mm 6 o Fomn Country IV. NATUREOF SUIT (Ham. -x-In anew: my)mmmmcru ='r ~z-1‘om 7 ‘ 1v , .. ..- Auuurrcv‘ amusnmns I IO Immune pm“, INJURY pgngm‘l, lmuuy 625 ml Relmd Scinn ol‘ 422 Anal 2| USCi I58 I J15 Fab: Chins AclmMum mAim.“ ,6,Mm.hm MM w hm 2| USC! “I m wicManI 23 usc mournmul usc '30 Mill" MI m Aminemm Li-simy l-i-biirx ’ “”0"" i "7 9 37’9“” I40 Ncplilblc lmwm no”mmum g5W 361 Health Cuef m pmnfimam , 400SmcWhamm ISORmvyof norm - W“Wm nor m. wswmu uoc ‘ "““fim ompy-vum or Linhilixywm" "W!Mn Lnbllny m L: ' ‘ fl mPm?” 4m emum noun...Vflcnn‘s Banfiu w M. . 363Aim Prams! Injmy R :1.” mu" ' ‘50Cm Isl Medium Au '3'” . _ Prom:ummy ‘_'W mmnmxm New . 345 MumcMm Lumluy "ISO” L P 0mm, m nulmyumAu Dun. Appaiuuon 460Wm”1 :fukw's’twflm aso Mom vain: 7 ‘ A n 75: runny ad Medial m1w "0 “film”Mme“ fi ym, ass Mono: Vania:Pm g ogmu'“ .F'M . m“M W“ CW °""‘""'°“‘ I”KW or Lilbiity 7| "'W 1900Mde Lulwton "-i --‘ ‘wCmCW4"WWW. momma: Injury 33°0*"W"WY m wow: neum. “I BIA (13950) 4:5mmComm . mWMM_W Dams: .m 5mm,M uz Buck Lung (923) rmwuon Auol‘Vclmn s Bending I .. m s' 1M. s ,n mm 385M Dunne I’M:- lmflm w Dlwcmlww (405(3)) 490Cahw TV m “”c” "' ”m"? :2------ m ssno'riuc xv: mmummuu m °“"" :‘m‘ LN“ ' cwn.mcmw . msoun mamas ‘ ’fmf". "PW us as: «om» 5‘0"“ m 5%"; “m" ’ «omfravilmm «nus conrus «s omMunmn ’mum:sum :3? m3”?“m” ‘ ‘I v«m‘ 463 Alienm Mimi! mt” (u s Phwm'or Au‘ m A“,nunmom" x“, Emplm, mmm,“v” W' msaw mum 2 Io Lunacwiu 1;“; nwgany 5cm "I Imam“ Pm, 26 Usc I95 Facedom orlnl'onmtmn 220Fm Ion! 510 0cm"! 516m Act, ‘ no nun Lem a 35mm 445 Ana.Mia- sas Dun. rcuuy '9‘”Wm“ 240 'rom coum Ewlwmm t mum ”MAMMN “MA .I or 14$ TonW Liability :‘M‘mW‘Mk' 540 Mum»: a0M Amy Decking“ 19o All 00m lc-l Monty a“um” 550CW“ WIN! 950 Consliluumlizy omec SSSMmcmfion Slllulu $60 Civil Outlaw- Condm'om of Confincmm V. ORIGIN (Hmm- -x"m mural” I Onmnnl x 2 Removed I'm I Rm {um 4 Multilcd at S Tnmrumd {tom ,4 6 Multidinricl I MulddiunzlWu; Sm: Own Appellate Com Reopeuud Am Dimict (map) Litigation Tamra LitlmuomDhm File V|_ CAUSEm" Cite the U.S. Civil Smut: undet whichm arc fllin: (0omclnluM'd-ulmmumJIM}: J ACTION 2:vac.u 1m. m: ma me 4 Briefguqiution ofaun. Wuuum-mev-umuamvwidWQéIMuuu-nui‘é‘ouuw-‘u'uuuu’ummuu’ab’n VII. REQUESTED IN CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND S CHECK YES only ifdemlnded in complaint: COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23. Fed. R. Civ. P. JURY DEMAND: X Yes No Vlll. RELATED CASE(S), JUDGE . X DOCKET NUMBER ‘ , w {IL .HIFANY m;muwk " ‘ I ~ ' IX. DIVISIONAL ASSIGNMENT (Civil Local Rule 3-2) (rhea an “x" in One Box Only) SAN FRANCISCOIOAKLAND X SAN JOSE EUREKA-MCKJNLEWILLE ’ 5 DATE 02127-T2020 SIGNATURE or ATIORNEY or RECORD fi’L-W 234$,- Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-2 Filed 02/27/20 Page 2 of 3 JS-CAND 44 (m. 07Il9) INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS-CAND 44 Authority For Civil Cover Sheet. The JS-CAND 44 civil cover sheel and Ihe information contained herein neither replaces nor supplemenls the filings and service of pleading oxolherpapets as required by law, excepl as provided by local ml“ ofcoun. This form. apptoved in ils original fonn by the Judicial Conference of the United States in Sepicmber I914. is required for Ihe Cletk of Court lo initiate the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submilled Io the Clerk ofConn for each civil complaint filed. The allomcy filing a case should complete the form as follows: l. a) b) c) IV. vl' VII. VIII. Ix. Plalntlm-Defendanu. Emanama (lasl. first. middle inilial) of plainlifl‘and defendant If Ihe plainlifl‘ or defiendanl is a govemmml agency, use only Ihe full name or standard abhnvialions. If Ihe plainlifl‘ or defendanl is an official wilhin a government agency. identify firsl the agency and then Ihe official. giving bolh name and lille. County ofResldence. For each civil case filed, excepl U.S. plaintifl‘cam. enler the name of Ihe county where Ihe firs! listed plaintiff resides at the lime of filing. ln U.S. plaintifl‘cases. enler the name ofthe county in which Ihe first listed defendanl resides at the lime of filing. (NOTE: ln land condemnation cases. lheoounlyof lesidence of Ihe "defendant” is Ihe location oflhe uacl ofland involved.) Attorneys. Enler Ihe film name. addless. Ielephone number, and altomey of record. Iflhere are several allomcys. lisl Ihem on an allachmenl. noting in this section “(sce allachmenl)!‘ Jurisdiction. The basis ofjurisdiclion is set fonh under Federal Rule of Civil Procedute 8(a). which requires that jurisdictions be shownin pleadings. Place an "X" in one of Ihe boxes. If there is more Ihan one basis ofjurisdiclion. precedence is given in the ordershown below. (I)Wm Jurisdiction based on 28 USC §§ l345 and 1348. Suits by agenda and officers ofthe United Slates are included here. (2) united States dgenml. When Ihe plainliffis suing the Uniled Slates. ils officers or agencies. place In "X" in this box. (3) Eggnl gualion. This reliefs Io suits under 28 USC § I3 3|. when jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United Slam, an amendment to the Conslitulion. an act of Congress or a lrealy ofthe Uniled Slales. In cases where Ihe U.S. is I pmy. the U.S. plainlifl‘ or defendant code (aka pmdence. and box l or 2 should be marked. (4) This refers to suits under 28 usc 5 I332. whm paniam ciuiaens ordimemu sum. When Box 4 is checked. the citizenship of the difiicrenl pania musl be checked. (See Seclion III below; NOTE: federal question nctlonl take precedence over dlverslty clues.) Residence (cltlunlhlp) ofl’rluclpnl Partial. This section of Ihe JS-CAND 44 is lo be compleled ifdiversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark Ihis seclion for each principal party. Nature of Suit. Place an “X" in the appropriale box. If the nalure of suit cannol be determined, be sure the cause of aclion. in Seclion Vl below, is sufficient lo enable the deputy clerk or Ihe stalislical clerk“) in the Administrative Office Io determine Ihe nature of suil. If Ihe causc flls more than one nature of suil. select Ihe mosl deflnilive. Origin. Place an “X" in one oflhe six boxa. (l)W Cases originaling in Ihe United States district comm. (2)WW Ptoceedings initialed in slate courts may be removed lo the district oouns under Title 28 USC § l44l. When Ihe pelilion for removal is granted. check lhis box- (3) m Check this box fa cam remanded lo Ihe dislrict coun for further action. Usc Ihe dale of remand as the filing dale. (4) Reinstaled or5mm, Check lhis box for cases reinslaled or nopmd in the district court. Use the reopening dale as Ihe filing dale. (5) [nngferred {tom Agglbgz pigm'gg Forcam transfened under Title 28 USC § I404“). Do not use this for within dislticl transfers or mullidislricl liligalion Iransfm. (6) Check lhis box when a mullidislricl casc is transferred into Ihe district under authority ofTillc 28 USC § I407. When this box Is checked. do nol check (5) above. (8) Mullidifldsl LfllfllinnDimleilg. Check lhis box when a mullidisln'cl litigation casc is filed in the same district as the Maslet MDL dockel.WW Origin Code 7 was used for hislofical records and is no longer relevant due Io changes in slalule. Cause ofActlon. Repon the civil statute direclly relaled Io Ihe cause ofaclion and give a briefdacriplion of the cause. Do not cite jurlsdlctinnal statutes unless diversity.Emmy U.S. Civil Slalule: 47 USC § SS3.W Unauthorized reception of cable service. Requested In Complaint.W Place an “X" in this box ifyou are filing a class action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Demag. ln this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand. such as a preliminary injunction. Jug Demag. Check the appropriaie box Io indicate whether or nol a jury is being demanded. Related Cues. This section of Ihe JS-CAND 44 is used Io identify related pending cam. if any. If there are relaled pending cam. inscrl the dockel numlms and the correspondingjudge nama for such c356. Divisional Anlgnment. 1f the Nalun of Suil is under Propctty Rights or Prisoner Petitions or the mallet is a Securities Class Action. leave this seclion blank. For all other cases. identify the divisional venue according Io Civil Local Rule 3-2: “the county in which a substantial pan of Ihe evenls or omissions which give risc lo the claim occuned or in which a substantial part oflhe propeny that is Ihe subject of the aclion is situated." Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover shoal. ONQQMhMN- MN NN qaabu33853333335:8 28 FORD a HARRISON LLP Arman"M Law IAN FIAKCIW Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 1-2 Filed 02/27/20 Page 3 of 3 PROOF OF SERVICE I, Bridgette C. Burdick, declare: I am a citizen of the United States and employod in Alameda County, California. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled action. My business address is 1901 Harrison Street, Suite 1650, Oakland, California 94612. On February 27, 2020, I electronically filed the attached document: CIVIL COVER SHEET ‘ with the Clerk ofthe court using the CM/ECF system which will then send a notification of such filing to the following: ECFService List And I hereby do certify that I have mailed by United States Postal Service the document to the following non CMIECF participants: Non ECF Service List I declare that I am employed in the office of a member ofthe bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. Executed on February 27, 2020, at Oakland, California. lgBridgate C. Burdick Bridgette C. Burdick OHNOMAUJN~ \IQM#U -°OWNOM&wN-‘o 28 Foao l: HARRISON LL? Anon"! M’ LAII I. o-Mimi.” Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 2 Filed 02/27/20 Page 1 of 3 Timothy L. Reed, Bar No. 258034 treed@fiordharrison.com Noah M. Woo, Bar No. 31 l 123 nwoo@fordharrison.com FORD & HARRISON LLP 505 Montgomery Street, Suite 1001 San Francisco, CA 941 1 1 Telephone: 4 l 5-852-69 l 0 Facsimile: 415-852-6925 Attorneys for Defendants TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. and THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No. PAMELA WILLIAMS, an individual, DEFENDANTS’ CORPORATE plaintiff, DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P. 7.1 v. TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC., a _ . corporation; THE TERMINIX Action Flled: January l7, 2020 INTERNATIONAL COMPANY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a corporation; DOES 1 to 50, Inclusive, Defendants. -1- DEFENDANT? CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PURSUANT TO F.R.C P. 7 l ©WQOM&WN- QO‘M‘WNF‘ \DMQQMubWN-‘O 28 Form k HARRISON LLP Anon“;M LAN LM Anon.“ Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 2 Filed 02/27/20 Page 2 of 3 T0 THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES APPEARING 0F RECORD: In accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7. l, Defendants Terminix International, Inc. and The Tenninix International Company, Limited Partnership (collectively, “Defendants”) make the following disclosures in the above-captioned action: Defendant The Tenninix International Company, Limited Partnership has one general partner, Defendant Terminix International, Inc., and one limited partner, ScrviceMaster Consumer Services Limited Partnership. Defendant Terminix International, Inc. is a Delaware corporation having its principal place of business in Tennessee. ServiceMaster Consumer Services Limited Partnership has one general and two limited panners. The general partner is SMCS Holdco Il, Inc. The first limited partner is SMCS Holdco II, Inc., and the second limited partner is The ServiceMaster Company, LLC. SMCS Holdco II, Inc. and The ServiceMaster Company, LLC are a Delaware Corporation and a Delaware Limited Liability Company respectively with their principal places of business in Tennessee. SMCS Holdco II, Inc. is wholly owned by The ServiceMaster Company, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Tennessee. The ServiceMaster Company, LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of CDRSVM Holding, LLC. CDRSVM Holding, LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of CDRSVM Investment Holding, LLC, which is wholly owned by ScrviceMaster Global Holdings, Inc. The stock ofScrvichaster Global Holdings, Inc. is publicly traded. To the best of Defendants’ knowledge, no publicly held corporation or entity owns 10% or more of the stock of ServiceMaster Global Holdings, Inc., except that investment funds managed by Fidelity and Janus Funds each own in excess of 10%. Date: February 27, 2020 Respectfully submitted, FORD & HARRISON LLP By: /s/ Timothy L. Reed Timothy L. Reed Noah M. Woo Attorneys for Defendants TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. and THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP _ 2 _ DEFENDANTS'CORPORATE DISCLOSURESTATEMENT PURSUANTTO F.R.C.P 7 l \OWQQMAWNH NNNNNNNNr-n---~----H ”QMAU’N-‘OOWQOMé‘HN-‘o 28 Fono t Hamzlsou LLP Arron": A1 Law SAN FIMIC‘ICO Case 5:20-cv-01478-VKD Document 2 Filed 02/27/20 Page 3 of 3 EBOOF OF SERVICE I, Bridgette C. Burdick, declare: I am a citizen of the United States and employed in Alameda County. California. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled action. My business address is 1901 Harrison Street, Suite 1650, Oakland, California 94612. On February 27, 2020, I electronically filed the attached document: DEFENDANTS’ CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT PURSUANT T0 F.R.C.P. 7.1 with the Clerk of the coutt using the CMIECF system which will then send a notification of such filing to the following: ECF Service List And I hereby do certify that I have mailed by United States Postal Service the document to the following non CM/ECF participants: Non ECF Service List 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. Executed on February 27, 2020, at Oakland, California. ls/ Bridgette C. Burdick Bridgette C. Burdick OOOQQUIAWNH NNNNNNN -- uauan-BEESEMEG5:5 28 FORD & HARRISON LLP Amman A7 Law San lunclxo base OMU-CV-UL‘HO-VKU DocumEHI 6 I'IIBU UdlélIZU Page .l. OI d Timothy L. Reed, Bar No. 258034 treed@fordharrison.com Noah M. Woo, Bar No. 3 l l 123 nwoo@fordharrison.com FORD & HARRISON LLP 505 Montgomer Street, Suite 1001 San Francisco, A 941 ll Telephone: 415-852-6910 Facsimile: 415-852-6925 Attorneys for Defendants TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. and THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA PAMELA WILLIAMS, an individual, Case No. Plaintiff, DEFENDANTS’ CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED ENTITIES0R PERSONS V- PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 3-15 TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC., a corporation; THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a corporation; DOES l to 50, Inclusive, Defendants. DEFENDANTS' CERTIFICATE 0F INTERESTED ENTITIES OR PERSONS PURSUANT T0 CIVIL LOCAL RULE 3-15 WMQO‘MAWNM H-OP-‘D-OI-1 Awn-c 15 16 17 18 l9 20 2] 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Fouo k HARRISON LLP flilolfllvl NI LAW SAI Inucucn Uase bIZU-CV-Ul4I8-VKU Document 3 I-Iled UZIZ IIZU Page Z OT 3 Pursuant to Civil LR. 3-15, the undersigned certifies that the following listed persons, associations of persons, firms, partnerships, corporations (including parent corporations) or other entities (i) have a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a patty to the proceeding, or (ii) have a non-financial interest in that subject matter or in a party that could be substantially affected by the outcome of this proceeding: Dated: Terminix International, Inc. The Terminix Intcmational Company, Limited Partnership ServiceMaster Consumer Services Limited Partnership (Defendant The Terminix International Company, Limited Partner’s limited partner) SMCS Holdco II, Inc. (ServiceMaster Consumer Services Limited Partnership’s general and limited partner) The ServiceMaster Company, LLC (Service Master Consumer Services Limited Partnership’s limited partner) February 27, 2020 FORD & HARRISON LLP By: Isl Timothy L. Reed Timothy L. Reed Noah M. Woo Attorneys for Defendants TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL, INC. and THE TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL COMPANY, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP WSACTIVELLPil 1320”! .l DEFENDANTS’ CERTIFICATE OF -l- INTERESTED ENTITIES OR PERSONS PURSUANT TO CIVIL LOCAL RULE 3-15 ONQOUIéUN- NNNNNNNN qouwa-o5533335533 28 FORD a HARRISON Afloat“! N7 LAN SAN "autism Case bZZU-CV-Ul4IB-VKU Document 3 l-Iled UZIZ IIZU Page 3 OT 3 PROOF 0F SERVICE I, Bridgette C. Burdick, declare: l am a citizen ofthe United States and emoloyed in Alameda County, California. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to t he within-entitled action. My business address is I901 Harrison Street, Suite 1650, Oakland, California 94612. On February 27, 2020, I electronically filed the attached document: DEFENDANTS’ CERTIFICATE 0F INTERESTED ENTITIES 0R PERSONS PURSUANTT0 CIVIL LOCAL RULE 3-15 with the Clerk of the court using the CMIECF system which will then send a notification of such filing to the following: ECF Service List And Ihereby do certify that I have mailed by United States Postal Service the document to the following non CMIECF participants: Non ECF Service List I declare thatI am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. Executed on February 27, 2020, at Oakland, California. /s/Bridgenig Burdick Bridgette C. Burdick OOOQO‘tUI-hUJN-I NNNNNNNNflH-n-t-ap-t--fl-I \IQMAWNHOOWQQMAWN-o 28 FORD k HARRISON LLP ATTORNHS Ar LAw L05 ANGEIJiS PROOF OF SERVICE I, Bridgette C. Burdick, declare: I am a citizen of the United States and employed in Alameda County, Calif'omia. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled action. My business address is 1901 Harrison Street, Suite 1650, Oakland, Califbmia 94612. On March 3, 2020, I served a copy of the within document(s): DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF AND STATE COURT OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION D ELECTRONICALLY: I caused a true and correct copy thereof to be electronically filed using the Court's Electronic Court Filing ("ECF") System and service was completed by electronic means by transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing on the registered participants ofthe ECF System. I served those parties who are not registered participants of the ECF System as indicated below. BY MAIL: I placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid. D BY OVERNIGHT MAIL: By placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed Federal Express envelope and affixing a pre-paid air bill and causing the envelope to be delivered to a Federal Express agent for delivery. Eric B. Kingsley, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff Liane Katzenstein Ly, Esq. PAMELA WILLIAMS Jessica L. Adlouni, Esq. KINGSLEY & KINGSLEY, APC 16133 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1200 Encino, CA 91436 Telephone: (818) 990-8300 Facsimile: (818) 990-2903 I declare thatl am employed in the office of a member of the State Bar of this Court at whose direction the service was made. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States ofAmerica that the above is true and correct. Executed on March 3, 2020, at Oakland, California. Bridgem. Burdick WSACTIVELLP ll3 l 1637.1 CERTIFICATE 0F SERVICE