RequestCal. Super. - 6th Dist.December 3, 2020KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP. APC 7 .p \DOOQONU‘I 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 g6 27 1&82 ZOCV373798 Santa Clara - Civil KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC Abbas Kazerounian, Esq. (249203) ak@kazlg.com Mona Amini, Esq. (296829) mona@kazlg.com Pamela E. Prescott, Esq. (328243) pamela@kazlg.com 245 Fischer Avenue, Unit D1 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Telephone: (800) 400-6808 Facsimile: (800) 520-5523 [Additional Counsel On Signature Page] Attorneysfor Plaintiff Phuonganh Hoang Electronically Filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 12/1/2021 2:58 PM Reviewed By: R. Walker Case #20CV373798 Envelope: 7768206 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA - CIVIL COMPLEX PHUONGANH HOANG, Individually and On Behalf 0f All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. APPLE INC., Defendant. Case No.2 20CV373798 Assigned for all purposes to: Hon. Sunil R. Kulkarni Dept. 1 PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE PURSUANT T0 CRC 3.770(C) Plaintiff Phuonganh Hoang (“Plaintiff’) hereby requests voluntary dismissal of the above 12/1/2021 2:58 PM captioned action, in its entirety, without prejudice as to Plaintiffs individual claims against Defendant Apple Inc. (“Defendant”) and without prejudice as t0 claims ofputative class members, pursuant to California Rules 0f Court, Rmifl/fléfifiKmWSee Declaration of Pamela E. Prescott (“Prescott Decl.”), fl 3; Declaration of Plaintiff Phuonganh Hoang (“Plaintiff Decl.”), 1] 4. 021 2:58 PM R” wa'ker 1 PLAINTIFF’s REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL PURSUANT T0 CRC 3.770(C) KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP. APC 7 \DOOQQ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 In requesting dismissal of this putative class action, there must be a determination of the disposition 0f the putative class claims, i.e., Whether they are t0 be dismissed With prejudice or without prejudice, for under California Rule 0f Court, Rule 3.770(a), it is an express requirement that a “dismissal 0f an entire class action, or 0f any party or cause of action in a class action, requires court approval.” The putative class claims here cannot be dismissed With prejudice because no class action has been certified and Plaintiff has n0 authority t0 request dismissal be with prejudice. In fact, Plaintiff has not filed a motion for class certification. See Prescott Decl., 11 6. As it pertinent here, “California Rules of Court, rule 3.770(0) conditions the dismissal of a putative class action 0n the trial court’s determination that ‘the dismissal will not prejudice’ putative class members.” Fid. Nat’l Home Warranty C0. Cases, 46 Cal. App. 5th 812, 827 (2020). See also, California Pretrial Practice & Forms § 29:403 (“the court may approve a voluntary dismissal without prejudice of the class claim (While the named plaintiffs claims are dismissed with prejudice) if the court finds (based on declarations submitted in support of the request) that dismissal Without notice will not prejudice the absent class members. [CRC 3.770(0)”). In compliance with California Rule 0f Court, Rule 3.770(3), accompanying this request for dismissal is a detailed supporting declaration of Pamela E. Prescott, counsel for Plaintiff. The requested dismissal Will not prejudice the rights of any putative class member because the dismissal of class claims is without prejudice t0 them asserting their claims in the future. Since n0 class has been certified, Rule 3.770(c)’s notice requirement for dismissals of certified classes is not operative. Second, where a class has not yet been certified, C.R.C. 3.770(0) provides that “the action may be dismissed without notice t0 the class members if the court finds that the dismissal will not prejudice them.” Here, because the claims of Plaintiff and unnamed putative class members are being dismissed without prejudice t0 them asserting their claims in the future, the dismissal will not prejudice them. Accordingly, n0 notice is required. Therefore, the dismissal without prejudice 0f putative class members’ claims is permissible without notice pursuant t0 California Rule 0f Court, Rule 3.770(0). Plaintiff respectfully requests that Plaintiff s individual claims as well as the claims 0f the 2 PLAINTIFF’s REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL PURSUANT T0 CRC 3.770(C) KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP. APC 7 \DOOQQ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 putative class members be dismissed without prejudice. See Prescott Decl. 1m 3-7. After further investigation, Plaintiffbelieves that the class action vehicle is not appropriate given the issues With commonality as well as Plaintiff’s desire not t0 proceed as a class representative at this time and request to dismiss the action without prejudice. Id. at W 4-7. There was n0 settlement between Plaintiff and Defendant, thus neither Plaintiff nor Plaintiff’s counsel received any monetary or non-monetary relief in exchange for this voluntary dismissal. 1d. In sum, based on the foregoing, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court to dismiss Plaintiff’s individual claims against Defendant without prejudice and to dismiss the claims of putative class members without prejudice. A proposed order is submitted herewith. KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC Date: December 1, 2021 By: walaaQM Pamela E. Prescott, Esq. pamela@kazlg.com Attorneysfor Plaintifl 3 PLAINTIFF’s REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL PURSUANT T0 CRC 3.770(C)
