Removal to Federal Court

Cal. Super. - 6th Dist.April 7, 2021

\OOOQONUIAUJNv-fi NNNNNNNNNr-awr-Hr-Iwr-tu-tr-np- “\IQMhWNHOQWQQM-pWNHO 21 CV381 733 Santa Clara - Civil TOREY JOSEPH FAVAROTE (SBN: 198521) JING TONG (SBN: 285061) GLEASON & VFAVAROTE, LLP 4014 Long Beach B1vd., Suite 300 Long Beach, California 90807 Telephone: (21 3) 452-05 1 0 Facsimile: (21 3) 452-05 14 tfavarote@gleasonfavarote.com jtong@gleasonfavarote.com Attorneys for Defendant TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC. Electronically Filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 6/11/2021 4:43 PM Reviewed By: F. Miller Case #21 CV381 733 Envelope: 6636352 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA - DOWNTOWN KIMBERLY WICKLANDER, an individual; Plaintiff, VS. TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive; Defendants. vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// 1 Case N0. 21CV381733 DEFENDANT’S NOTICE T0 ADVERSE PARTY OF REMOVAL OF THIS ACTION FROM STATE COURT TO DISTRICT COURT Judge: Hon. Peter Kirwan Dept: 19 Action Filed: April 7, 2021 Trial Date: None DEFENDANT’S NOTICE TO ADVERSE PARTY OF REMOVAL OF THIS ACTION FROM STATE COURT TO DISTRICT COURT . Vliller PLAINTIFF KIMBERLY WICKLANDER AND HER ATTORNEYS 0F RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT a Notice of Removal of this action was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on June 10, 2021, Federal Case No. 5:21-cv-04499-NC. A copy of said Notice of Removal is attached hereto as Exhibit A to this \OOOQQU‘I-hUJN 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Notice and is Served and filed herewith. Dated: June 11, 2021 2 GLEASON & FAVAROTE, LLP TOREY JOSEPH FAVAROTE JING TONG By: /W Ji ong V Attorne r Defendant T SDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC. DEFENDANT’S NOTICE TO ADVERSE PARTY OF REMOVAL OF THIS ACTION FROM STATE COURT TO DISTRICT COURT EXHIBIT A HI I kWh) \OOOQQUI 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 1 of 11 PAUL M. GLEASONSSzBN 155569) JING TONG (SBN 28 061) GLEASON & FAVAROTE) LLP 4014 Long Beach Blvd. Suite 300 Long Beach, California 90807 Telephone: 213 452-0510 FaCSImile: 213 452~0514 pgleason@gleasonfavarote.com 3tong@gleasonfavarote.com s for Defendant TRANSDEV ATIVE SERVICES, INC. Attorne ALTE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KIMBERLY WICKLANDER, an individual; Plaintiff, VS. TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive; Defendants. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// Case No. 5 :2 1-cv~04499-NC DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE COURT State Action Filed: April 7, 2021 Trial Date: None DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE COURT \OOOQO‘xkll-P 10 11 12 13 14 15 l6 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 2 of 11 TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, PLAINTIFF KIMBERLY WICKLANDER, AND HER ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that defendant TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC. (“Defendant”) hereby removes the above-referenced action from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Santa Clara t0 the United States District Coun for the Northern District of California, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. sections 1332, 1441, and 1446. This Notice is based. upon the original jurisdiction of the federal district court over the parties based upon the existence of diversity under 28 U.S.C. sections 1332, 1441 , and 1446. Defendant makes the following allegations in support of its Notice of Removal: JURISDICTION 1. This action is one over which this court has original jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. section 1332 and is one Which may be removed by Defendant pursuant t0 28 U.S.C. sections 1441 and 1446. This is a civil action where the amount in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between citizens 0f different states. 2. Venue is proper in this Court because this is the district court 0f the United States and division embracing the place where the state action is pending. 28 U.S.C. Section 1441 (a). 3. On or about April 7, 2021, plaintiff Kimberly Wicklander (“Plaintiff”) filed an original complaint in the Superior Court of the State of California in the County of Santa Clara, entitled KIMBERLY WICKLANDER, an Individual, V. TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC, a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, as case number 21CV381733 (the “Complaint”), wherein she alleges causes of action for: (1)Violation of California Equal Pay Act (Cal. Lab. Code §1 197.5); (2) Violation 0f Labor Code §98.6; (3) Gender (Sex) Discrimination 1 DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE COURT AWN QONKII 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 3 of 11 & Harassment in Violation of Government Code §12940 et. seq. (FEHA); (4) Sexual Harassment in Violation of FEHA; (5) Failure to Prevent Discrimination and Harassment in Violation of FEHA; (6) Retaliation in Violation of FEHA; (7) Waiting Time Penalties; (8) Unfair Business Practices in Violation of California Business and Professions Code 17200 et. seq. (9) Wrongful Termination in Violation 0f Public Policy. True copies of the Summons, Complaint, Civil Case Cover Sheet, and ADR Information Sheet, are attached t0 the Declaration of Jing Tong (“Tong Decl.”) as Exhibit A. V 4. On May 12, 2021, Defendant was served with the Complaint. A true and correct copy of the Service 0f Process Transmittal is attached as Exhibit B to the Tong Declaration. 5. On June 8, 2021, Defendant filed an Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint in Superior Court, County of Santa Clara. A true and correct copy of the Answer is attached t0 Tong Decl. as Exhibit C. 6. To Defendant’s knowledge, no other papers or processes have been filed 0r received in this matter by Defendant. INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT 7. Northern District of California Civil Local Rule 3-2 provides that all civil actions which arise in the countries of Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Benito or Monterey shall be assigned to the San Jose Division. See Northern District Local Rules 3-2(c) and (e), and 3-5(b). Plaintiffs filed this action in Santa Clara County. DIVERSITY JURISDICTION 8. This action is one over which this court has original jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. section 1332 and is one Which may be removed by Defendant pursuant t0 28 U.S.C. section 1441. This is a civil action where the amount in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000.00, exclusive 0f interest and costs, and is between citizens of different states. // / 2 DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL 0F CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE COURT QQUI-AUJN 00 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 4 of 11 9. Plaintiff’s Citizenship: As alleged in the complaint, “at all times material herein, Plaintiff, KIMBERLY WICKLANDER (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff? was and is a resident 0f the State of California, County of Stanislaus.” (Tong Decl., Exhibit A, Complaint, pg. 2, para.1 .) For diversity purposes, a person is a “citizen” of the state in which he 0r she is domiciled. Kantor V. Welleslev Galleries Ltd., 704 F.2d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 1983). Residence is prima facie evidence of domicile. State Farm Mutual Auto Ins. Co. V. Dver, 19 F.3d 514, 520 (10th Cir. 1994). Accordingly, Plaintiff is a citizen of the State of California. 10. Defendant’s Citizenship: Transdev Alternative Services, Inc. was, at the time of the filing of the state court action, and remains a corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business in the State of Illinois. (Declaration of Anna Fuentes (“Fuentes Decl.”), W26; a true and correct copy 0f Which is attached to the Tong Decl. as Exhibit D.) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1332(0), “a corporation shall be deemed to be a citizen 0f any State by which it has been incorporated. and of the State where it has its principal place of ’9 business. The Supreme Court has established the proper test for determining the principal place of business of a corporation for purposes of diversity jurisdiction. Hertz Corp. V. Friend, 559 U.S. 777 (2010). In Hertz: the Court held that “'principal place of business” [as contained in section 1332(c)] is best read as referring to the place where a corporation’s officers direct, control, and coordinate the corporation’s activities.” _I_(_1_. The Court further clarified that the principal place 0f business is the place where the corporation “maintains its headquarters-provided that the headquarters is the actual center of direction, control and coordination. . .” 1Q Defendant’s headquarters, and their executive and senior management personnel as well as their primary management operations are all located in Illinois. (Fuentes Decl., 114.) Moreover, the corporate officers of Transdev Alternative Services, Inc. actually direct, control and coordinate the corporation’s activities from Transdev Alternative Services, Inc.’s offices in Illinois. 15L The corporate human resources 3 DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE COURT \OOOQO‘s'JlkwN 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 5 0f 11 department, employee benefits department, legal department, procurement department, accounting department, and IT department utilized by Transdev Alternative Services, Inc. are located in Lombard, Illinois. Li. Simply put, Defendant’s center of “direction, control and coordination” is located in the State 0f Illinois; thus, for diversity purposes, Defendant must be considered a citizen of Illinois and Delaware (its state of incorporation). Accordingly, the Defendant is not a citizen of the State 0f California. 11. The citizenship of fictitiously named “Doe” defendants is t0 be disregarded for the purposes of removal. 28 U.S.C. section 1441(a). AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY 12. If the state coufl complaint expressly seeks more than $75,000.00, removal on the basis 0f diversity will be allowed unless the amount set forth in the initial complaint was stated in bad faith. Because plaintiff instituted the case in state court, there is a strong presumption plaintiff did not inflate the claim t0 support removal. See St. Paul Mercury Indem. Co. v. Red Cab Co., 303 US 283, 290 (1938); Sanchez V. Monumental Life Ins. C0., 102 F3d 398, 402 (9th Cir. 1996). 13. Plaintiff was terminated from her employment with Transdev on January 29, 2020. (Tong Decl., Exhibit A, Complaint, pg. 4, para.18.) Plaintiff alleges she was terminated for “pretextual reasons.” (151;) Plaintiff alleges as damages, “lost employment earnings and benefits, past and future, according t0 proof,” and “actual, consequential, and incidental financial loses, including without limitation, loss 0f salary and benefits, and the intangible loss 0f employment related opportunities in her field and damages to her professional reputation.” (Tong Decl., 112 Exhibit A; Complaint, pg. 5, paras. 25, 27, pg. 6, para, 36, pg. 8, para. 44, pg. 10, para. 51, pg. 12, para. 61., pg. 13, para. 68, pg. 18, para. 92.) Plaintiff also alleges general damages such as “mental. and physical distress and aggravation.” (Tong Decl., 112 Exhibit A; Complaint, pg. 6, para. 37, pg. 8, para. 45, pg. 10, para. 52, pg. 12, para. 62, pgs. 13-14, para. 69, pg. 18, para. 93.) Plaintiff also alleges punitive 4 DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE COURT \OOOQQU‘I#UJNr-a NNNNNNNNNHwHHr-tp-‘v-tp-tp-‘H OOQONM-fiWNHOCOOQQMhWNF-‘O Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 6 of 11 damages as a result of Defendant’s conduct. (Tong Decl., 112 Exhibit A; Complaint, pg. 7, para. 40, pg. 9, para. 47, pg. 11, para. 54, pg. 14 para. 71, pg. 19, para. 95.) Further, according to the “Prayer” in her Complaint, Plaintiff seeks the following damages from Defendant: 1. For general damages, according to proof; For special damages, according to proof; For loss 0f earnings, according t0 proof; For civil penalties under Labor Code sections 98.6, 1197.5, 210; For declaratory relief, according to proof; For attorneys’ fees, according to proof; For costs of suit incurred herein; For liquidated damages pursuant to Cal. Labor Code §1 197.5(g); PWSQSAPP’P For applicable statutory penalties including those pursuant to Cal. Labor Code §226(e) and 10. For such other and further relief as the court deems just and proper. (Tong Decl. 112 Exhibit A; pg. 19, paras. 1-1 1). 14. Defendant will be able to establish the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional limit. 15. Here, Plaintiff’s hourly rate of pay was $20.00 for full-time work. (Fuentes Decl., flS.) Plaintiff alleges in her complaint “lost employment earnings and benefits, past and future, according t0 proof,” and “actual, consequential, and incidental financial loses, including without limitation, loss of salary and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related opportunities in her field and damages to her professional reputation.” (Tong Decl., 112 Exhibit A; Complaint, pg. 5, paras. 25, 27, pg. 6, para., 36, pg. 8, para. 44, pg. 10, para. 51, pg. 12, para. 61., pg. 13, para. 68, pg. 18, para. 92.) Considering the “losses in earnings” and “other employment benefits,” Plaintiff’s economic damages from January 29, 2020 (the 5 DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL 0F CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE COURT flOflUl-bUJN 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 l9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 7 of 11 date of her termination) until trial, assuming a trial date 0f May 12, 2022 (which is one year from the date that Defendant was served with the Complaint) will exceed $95,200.00. ($20.00 an hour x 8 hours x 5 days x 119 weeks) (Fuentes Decl. 115.) In addition to her pay, Plaintiff also received health insurance benefits. 1g; 16. Plaintiff also seeks general damages such as “mental and physical distress and aggravation.” (Tong Decl., 112 Exhibit A; Complaint, pg. 6, para. 37, pg. 8, para. 45, pg. 10, para. 52, pg. 12, para. 62, pgs. 13-14, para. 69, pg. 18, para. 93.) Damages for emotional distress “may be considered When calculating the amount in controversy even where not clearly pled in the complaint.” Simmons v. PCR Technology, 209 F.Supp.2d 1029, 1034 (N.D. Cal. 2002). It is recognized that “emotional distress damages in a successful employment discrimination case may be substantial.” BL at 1034. ‘ 17. Plaintiff also seeks “reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.” (Tong Decl., 112 Exhibit A; Complaint, pg. 5, para. 28, pgs. 8-9, para. 46, pg. 10, para. 53, pg. 12, para. 63, pg. 14, para. 70, pg. 18, para. 94.) The Ninth Circuit has held that attomeys’ fees may be included in the amount in controversy if recoverable by statute 0r contract. Galt G/S V. JSS Scandinavia, 142 F.3d 1150, 1156 (9th Cir. 1998). The court in the case of Simmons, 209 F.Supp.2d at 1034-35 stated that “[attorneys’ fees] necessarily accrue until the action is resolved,” and thus, the Ninth Circuit [in 931:] must have anticipated that district courts would project fees beyond removal.” As such, the Simmons court held that the “measure 0f [attorneys’] fees should be the amount that can reasonably be anticipated at the time of removal, not merely those already incurred.” In fact, the court in Simmons noted that in its experience, “attorneys’ fees for individual discrimination cases often exceed the damages.” 18. Even a conservative estimate of attorneys’ fees in an employment case claiming statutory fees would support an amount in controversy that exceeds the jurisdictional minimum. See e.g. Lefldr V. Rancho Los Amigos/Countv 0f Los Allgglgg, BC 412351 (2010) (court awards plaintiff’s attorney’s fees in the amount of 6 DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE COURT \OOONO‘sM-hUJNw NNNNNNNNNHHHp-Iu-lp-awp-IHH OOQONUI-PwNHOKOOOQOUI-bWNHO Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 8 of 11 $171,918.) Thus, Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees (a figure which will necessarily accrue until the action. is resolved), also establishes that the instant action presents an amount in controversy in excess of $75,000.00. l9. Punitive damages are also included in calculating the amount in controversy if they are recoverable under state law. Davenport v. Mutual Ben. Health & Acc. Ass’n, 325 F.2d 785, 787 (9th Cir. 1963); see also Richmond v. Allstate Ins. Co. 897 F.Supp. 447, 450 (S.D. Cal. 2003). Plaintiff seeks punitive damages alleging that Defendant acted with “oppression, malice, and/or conscious disregard of Plaintiff’s rights.” (Tong Decl., 1] 2 Exhibit A; pg. 7, para. 40, pg. 9, para. 47, pg. 11, para. 54, pgs. 12-13, para. 64, pg. 14, para. 71, pgs. 18-19, para. 95.) If Plaintiff succeeds in establishing these allegations, she would be eligible for punitive damages under California Civil Code section 3294. California law does not provide specific monetary limitations on the amount 0f punitive damages that may be awarded under statute. Rather the proper amount 0f punitive damages is determined based 0n the reprehensibility 0f the defendant’s misdeeds - the ratio between compensatory and punitive damages, and the ratio between damages and defendant’s net worth. Boyle V. Lorimar Productions, Inc. 13 F.3d 1357, 1359-60 (9th Cir. 1994). Indeed, some courts have recognized that an award for punitive damages can be significant, and that in some cases, a punitive award itself could establish the amount in controversy. See e.g. Aucino V. Amoco Oil Co., 871 F.Supp. 332, 334 (S.D. Iowa 1994) (concluding in a discrimination and wrongful termination case that the purpose of punitive damages is to capture a defendant’s attention and deter others from similar conduct, and thus, the plaintiff’s claim for punitive damages could alone exceed the jurisdictional minimum). 20. Where it is not facially evident from the complaint that more than $75,000 is in controversy, the removing party need only show that it is more likely than not that the plaintiffs claim exceeds the jurisdictional minimum. Sanchez V. Monumental Life Ins. Co., 102 F.3d 398, 404 (9th Cir.1996). _S_¢__e_ Simmons 209 7. DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC. ’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE COURT \oooqoxuquN-x N N N N [\J N_N N N 1-» t-d p-d v-i p-a nut t-d r-a r-I rw- OOQONUl-thHOWOOQQUI-PWNWO Case 5:21~cv-O4499-NC Document 1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 9 of 11 F.Supp.2d at 1031-35 (finding that the plaintiffs alleged lost income 0f $25,600 at the time of removal included with unspecified amounts for medical expense damages, emotional distress damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees anticipated to incur through trial, satisfy the amount in controversy required to establish diversity jurisdiction); White v. FCI USA, Inc. 319 F.3d 672, 674 (5th Cir. 2003) (a wrongful termination claim including a “lengthy list of compensatory and punitive damages” including loss of pay, impaired earning capacity, emotional distress, etc. combined with a claim for attorney fees and punitive damages, was sufficient to exceed the $75,000 minimum amount in controversy required to establish diversity jurisdiction.) 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 exceed $75,000.00. Sanchez v. Monumental Life Ins. C0,, 102 F.3d 398, 404 (9th Cir. 1996); Luckett v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 171 F.3d 295 (5th Cir. 1999). 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. Hunt V. Washington State Apple Advertising Comm’n, 432 U.S. 333, 347-48 (1997); Galt G/S, 142 F.3d at 1155-56; Anthony V. Security Pac. Fin’l Services, Inc., 75 F.3d 31 1, 315 (7th Cir. 1996). 21. Here, the combination 0f Plaintiff’s claims for general damages, emotional distress, special damages, “loss earnings, deferred compensation, and 99 4‘ other employment benefits, medical expenses, and future medical expenses,” costs incurred including reasonable attorney’s fees, make it clear that the instant action presents a_n amount in controversy in excess 0f $75,000.00. Plaintiff’s claim for special damages, alone ($95,200.00) exceeds the $75,000.00 jurisdictional limit. Although Defendant vigorously denies that Plaintiff is entitled to recover any damages 0r other amounts in this matter, based 0n a conservative good-faith estimate of the value 0f the claims 0f this action, if Plaintiff prevails on each 0f her causes 0f action the amount in controversy requirement is satisfied. 8 DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S NOTICE 0F REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE COURT \OOOQONUIAUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-twwt-np-twb-ar-IHH OONONUI-QUJNHODOOQQUI-prh-‘O Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 10 of 11 THE REMOVAL IS TIMELY 20. As required by 28 U.S.C. section 1446 (d), this Notice of Removal is timely in that it has been filed within thirty (30) days of service of the Complaint 0n June 11, 2021. 21. As required by 28 U.S.C. section 1446(d), Defendant will give notice 0f this removal to Plaintiff through his attorneys 0f record. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS 22. By filing this Notice of Removal, Defendant does not concede nor waive any defense 0r motion relating to this action. Defendant reserves all defenses. WHEREFORE, having provided notice as required by law, the above-titled action should be removed from the Superior Court for the County Santa Clara to this Court. Dated: June 10, 2021 GLEASON & FAVAROTE, LLP PAUL M. GLEASON JING TONG Byz/s/ Jing Tong Jing Tong Attome s for Defendant TRANSDEV ALTE ATIVE SERVICES, INC. 9 DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE COURT \OMflQM-§th-I NNNNNNNNNHHHHflHHp-HH OOVOMAWNr-‘QCOOQONUIAUJNHO Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 11 of 11 PROOF OF SERVICE I, Thomas Steinhart, .declare: . ' . . I I am_ and was at the tlme ofthe servxce. menponed 1n thls declaration, em loyed 1n the Countx of Los Angeles, Cahforma. I am pver the age of 18 years an not agarty to the w1th1n actiop. My busmess address ls Gleason & Favarote, LLP, 401 Lon? Beach Blvd., Sulte 300, Long Beach, CA.90807. On June 0 2021 Iserved a cowl?) of the followm documen§s&DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTE A IVE SERVICE INC.’s TICE 0F OREMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION FROM STAfE COURT fqnllthe partles to this action by placing them in a sealed envelope(s) addressed as o ows: ' Attorney Party(ies) Served Method of Service Jose h M. Lovretovich Attorne s for First Class Mail Eric . Gruzen Plainti Christina R. Manalo KIMBERLY JML LAW WICKLANDER 5855 Toganga Canyon Boulevard, Sulte 3O . Woodland H1115 CA 91367 Tel: (8188) 6103800 Fax: (81 )610-3030 jml@_1mllqw.com e zen mllaw.com c ristina jmllaw.com ¥BY MAILA I placed the sgaled enve1ope(fs) for collection and mailing by ollowug t. e ondmary busmpss raptgce o Gleason & Favarote, LLP, Long Beach, allforma. I am readlly amlhar with Gleason & Favarote, LLPfs {racthe for collectmg and prpcessu} of cqrrequndence for mailmg Wlth he United Stgtes Postal SerV1ce, sa1 practice bem that, 1n thq ordln cqurse of bqsmess, correspondencp With postage fu 1y.p1_'epa1d ls deposxted ngl thp Unlted States Postal Serv1ce the same day as 1t is placed for co ectlon. D EBY OVERNIGHT COURIER] I caused the sealed.enveIOpe(s) to be ellvered bfi/ a commerCIal courier service for overmght dehvery to the offices oft e addressee(s). D BY HAND] I directed thg sealed envplope(s) to the arty(ies) so ' £31 ated on the service hst to be dell'vered by Ace ttomey Serv1ce, Inc. ls ate. D [BY CM/ECF S.YSTEM1 Ipaused the above-referench document; séto be sent by electrqmc trapsrmssmn to the Clprk’s Office us;n yhe C F S stem for fi_11ng whlph pnerated a Notlce ofElectromc 11mg to the CK/I/ECF reglstrants 1n ls case. I declare under penalty of erj under the .laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct, an that t is declaratlon was executed on June 10, 2021, at Long Beach, California. omasSteinhart 1 PROOF OF SERVICE \DMNJGMhWNr-i NNNNNNNNNHI-Iv-‘HHHHHHH mflmmubWNF‘OWWQQUIhUJNP‘O Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 1 0f 47 PAUL M. GLEASON S:BN 155569) JING TONG (:SBN 28 O61) GLEASON & FAVAROTE) LLP 4014 Long Beach Blvd” Suite 300 Long Beach, California 90807 Telephone: €213 452 0510 Facmmile: 213 452-0514 pgleason@gleasonfavarote.com Jtong@gleasonfavarote.com Attorne s for Defendant TRANSDEV ALTE ATIVE SERVICES, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KIMBERLY WICKLANDER, an individual; Plaintiff, VS. TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC, a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive; Defendants. /// /// /// /// /// /// /// Case No. DECLARATION OF JING TONG IN SUPPORT OF REMOVAL State Action Filed: April 7, 2021 Trial Date: None DECLARATION OF JING TONG IN SUPPORT OF REMOVAL \OMQQM-hMNH NNNNNNNNNHHHHHp-Hu-iww °°QO\M#WNHO©W\IO\MAWNHO Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 2 of 47 DECLARATION OF JING TONG I, Jing Tong, hereby declare and state as follows: 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice in the state of California and I am admitted to practice before this Court. Except as to those matters stated on information and belief, I have direct and personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein and if called upon to do so, I could and would competently testify to the same. 2. I am informed and believe that plaintiff Kimberly Wicklander (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint against Transdev Alternative Services, Inc. (“Defendant” or “Transdev”) on April 7, 2021. A true and correct copy of the Summons, Complaint, and Civil Case Cover Sheet, is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 3. I am informed and believe that the Summons, Complaint, and Civil Case Cover Sheet attached as Exhibit A was personally served on defendant Transdev Alternative Services, Inc. on May 12, 2021 at 1:14 pm. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the Service of Process Transmittal defendant Transdev Alternative Services, Inc. received. 4. On June 8, 2021, Defendant filed an Answer to Plaintiff’s Complaint in the Superior Court, County of Santa Clara. A true and correct copy is attached hereto as Exhibit C. 5. No other pleadings, process and/or orders were served upon or by Defendant in the state court action. /// /// /// /// /// // / /// /// 1 DECLARATION 0F JING TONG IN SUPPORT OF REMOVAL \OOOQOSMhUJNv-n NNNNNNNNNuHHw-ams-ov-do-dww OOQONM-bWNF‘OCWflQMkWNF-‘O Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 3 of 47 6. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is the declaration of Anna Fuentes, Director of Human Resources for Transdev, in support of Transdev’s Notice of Removal. 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, and that this declaration is made and executed on June 10, 2021, at Long Beach, California. @x/ “?JEg Tony 2. DECLARATION 0F JING TONG IN SUPPORT OF REMOVAL Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 4 of 47 EXHIBIT A 2 -cv-O 499-NC ent - i e 0f HI I Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 5 of 47 sumac SUMMONS memrusemv (CIrAcmN JUDICIAL) ”“mmwmm «once To DEFENDANT: - (Awso AL DEMANDADO): §,;,'2L(,E;_,D1 9:34 AM TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC, a Delaware Clerk ofCom corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive; Superior Court of CA. you ARE same suen av PLAINTIFF: County of Santa Clara (Lo ssrA osmumuoo EL DEMANDANTE): 21CV381733 KIMBERLY WICKLANDER, an individual; ‘ Reviewed By: Y- Chavez - Envelope: 6189815 NOTICE! You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heatd unless you respond within 30 days. Read the information beiow. You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS mar this summons and toga: papers are sewed on you to fits a wrlaon response at his court and have a copy servad on flu plaintiff. A tefler or phone call will not protect you. Your written response must be in proper legal form if you want the com! to hear your ease. There may be a coutt form that you can use for your response. You can find these court forms and more inhrmation at the California Courts Online Self-Holp Center (www.coudwosagov/ulnwp). your county law iibmy, or the ooutthouao nearest you. If you cannot pay the flung fee. ask the court clerk for a fee waivsr form. Ifyou do not filo your msponse on time. you may lose the case by default. and your wages. money. and propany may be taken withoutmmmm from tho court. There are othtr legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. l1you do not know an attorney. you may warn to can an attorney referral service. If you came! afford an auomay, you may be eligible Io: free legal services from a mnprofit iogal services program. You can locate these nonprofit groups It Ibo California Loyal Services Web site (www.lawhalpcalifomic.om). tho California Couns Online Self-Help Center (www.coudeo.ca.gov/smm. or by contacting your local noun or county bar association. NOTE: The court has a statmory lien for walvod fees and costs on any semen“! or arbitration award of $10,000 o: mom in a cMI case. The court’s lien must be paid baton the coon win dismiss the case. [AWSOI Lo hen damandado. Si no msponde dentro d9 3O dies, la aorta puade dacidiron su contra sin ascuchar cu wm'én. Lea la Womacibn a continuacidn. Time 30 DIAS DE CALENDARIO después do qua lo ontmguan cue cilacién ypapales legals:pm presentaruna raspuesta par escrilo en sate cone y hecorque so ontregua una copia a! damandanle. Una cam o una llamada telefém‘ca no Io protegen.’ Su roapuesla por oscrito (ions qua 98m en tomato legal oomcto sldam qua pmcasen su caso on Ia cone. Es poslblo qua hays an formuian‘o qua ustodpueda usarpara su rospuosta. Puoda ancontmr eslos formalities ds Ia coda y mas Mannheim on a! Contra do Ayuda dc las Cams da Califomia {wwmucortmcagov}. an 1a blbfiotaca de (ayes d5 su candado o an la code qua Io quads ma; coma. Sino puade pagarla cuota d9 prasantacién, pide a! socretaria do la carts qua Ia dd un formulan'o dc cxonddn da pago do cuatas. SI no pmnnta su mspuesta a tiempo. puode perder al case par incumpk‘miento y Ia code Ia podré quitar su suoldo, (momyManes sin mas advartoncia. Hay otros requisites legal». Es racomandable qua llama a un abogada inmodiatamome. Si no canoes a un abogado. puade llamar a un servicio do remisidn a abogados. Sino puede pager a an abogado. es posiblo qua cumpla con los quwsitos para obtonar sorvia‘os legales gratuitos d9 an pragmma dc soM’cios lagaies sin fines do Iucm. Puodo omnirar esfos grupos sin fines do lucro en e! sitia web dc California Legal Services, (vmeawheipcalifomilmg). en ol Contra dc Ayuda do las Cortes do Califamia. (www.suaorte.ca.gov) o poniéndose on oontaclo con Ia cone o e! colagio d9 abogados males. AVISO: Parley, Ia com fieno demcho a redamar Ias cuotas y Ios castes exanlos parimponor un gravamen sabre cuaiquierrecuperacién dc $10,000 O mas d9 valor reofblda madlante un acuordo o una concelen do arbitraje an an caso de derecho clvit. Tlone qua pager e! gravamen da Ia cone antes dc qua la cone pueda dosechar e! caso. '(rg’e nan: anddiaddcrgzsdofrmoczun i3: ’ mwg‘” DO”? my lac 98¢ 98$: ' SANTA CLARA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT 21CV331 733 191 North First Street San Jose, CA 95 I 13 The name, address. and telephone number of plaintiffs attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney. is: {El nombre. Ia direccién y el namero da telefono del abogado de! demandante, a d9! demandante qua no liens abogado, es): Joseph M. Lovretovich; Eric M. Gruzcn; Christina R. Manalo - 5855 Tapanga Canyon Boulevard, Suite 300 Wcodiand Hilts, CA 91367 (81 8) 61 0-8800 DATE: . Clerk. by . Deputy (Ma) 4/7/2021 9.34 AM Clerk of Cour! (Sammie) Y. Chavez (Mimic) (Forproofof service of this summons. use Proof of §ervice of §ummons Form POS-O10).) (Para prueba d9 entrega d9 esta citation use el formulario Proof of Service of Summons, (POS-Ow». NOTICE TO THE PERSON SERVED: You are served 1.D as an individual defendant. 2.E as the person sued under the fictitious name of (specify): 3. on behaif of {specim- Transdev Alternative Services. |nc.. a Delaware corporation under: ccp 416.10 (corporation) D cop 416.60 (minor)D CCP 416.20 (defunctcorporation) m CCP 416.70 (conservatee)E CCP 416.40 (association or partnership)D CCP 416.90 (authorized person) E3 otherlspecim: 4.m by personal delivety on (data): Ea. t of 1 FormWhammm Ute Codie! 412. , 0' a m SUMMONS ”Mamas: 2° :5sumac mum 1. zoos] JML LAW A WWW $855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 H WQQfiM$CflN NNNNNNNNNHH-‘HHHHHHI-a MQQMAWN~O©WQQM#UNHO Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/1 0/71 Dngp R nf A7 E-FILED 4/7/2021 9:34 AM Cierk of Court ApnmeLhflmon . _ , Superior Court of CA,5.55mmmm,,smm . County of Santa Clara wooowuomuacmsonm 91367 21 CV38]733 W: (818)810-8300 _ ‘ Reviewed By: Y. Chavez Fax: [818) 510-3030 JOSEPH M. LOVRETOVICH. STATEBAR N0. 73403 ERIC M. GRUZEN, STATE BAR NO. 222448 CHRISTINA R. MANALO, STATE BAR NO. 297718 Anomeys for Plaintiff IGMBERLY WICKLANDER SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE 0F CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ~DOWNTOWN KIMBERLY WICKLANDER, an Case No.: 21 9V381733 _mdxvxdual; COMPLAINT FOR; Plaintiff l. VIOLATION 0F CALIFORNIA EQUAL ?AY ’ ACT (CAL. LAB. CODE § 1197.5); vs 2. VIOLATION OF LABOR CODE § 98.6; ' 3. GENDER (SEX) DISCRIMINATION & HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF GOVERNMENT CODE § 12940ETSEQ. TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE [FEHAR SERVICES, INC“ a Dglawam 4. SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION 0F ' . FEHA; .°°rp°‘fat’,°n' and DOES 1 mug“ 50’ s. FAILURE To ?REVENT DISCRIMINATIONmam“, AND HARASSMENT 1N VIOLATION 0F FEHA; RETALIATION IN VIOLATION 0Fmm; warms TIME rENAL'nEs; UNFAm BUSINESS PRACTICES m VIOLATION 0F CALIFORNIA BUSINESS AND Pkomssxous cont; § moo. 21352.,- 9. WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN - VIOLATION 0F PUBLIC POLICY Defendants. 9399‘ DEMEQ FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff, KIMBERLY WICKLANDER, hereby brings her complaint against the above- named Defendants and states and alleges as follows: i COMPLAINT JML LAW ammm 5855 Taping: Cnnyon Blvd.. Suite 300 Woodland Hills, CA 91 367 \OW‘IQM&NNt-I NNNNNNNNNflflh-pr-I-p‘wm mfiam¢mNHOWWQQthNHC Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 7 of 47 PRELIMINARY ALLEGATIONS 1. At all times material herein, Plaintiff, KIMBERLY WICKLANDER (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff’) was and is a resident ofthe State of California, County of Stanislaus. 2. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and based thereon alleges that Defendant TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC. (hereinafier referred to as “TRANSDEV” or Defendant) is a Delaware corporation, and was at all times mentioned in this complaint Buly licensed to do business, was and is doing business, under and by virtue ofthe lafis of the State of California, in Santa Clara County. 3. At all times material herein, Plaintifi'was employed by Defendant in the State of California, County of Santa Clara. 4. At all times mentioned herein Defendants DOES l through 50, and each of them, were and are the shareholders, and/or directors, and/or officers, and/or agents, and alter egos of Defendant, and in doing the things herein described, were acting within the scope of their authority as such shareholders, and/or directors, andlor officers, and/or agents, and alter egos of Defendant. S. The true names and capacities, whethervindividual, corporate, associate or otherwise of DOES 1 through SO are unknown to Plaintiffwho therefore sues these Defendants under said fictitious names. Plaintiff is informed and believes that each of the Defendants named as a DOE Defendant is legally reSponsible in some manner for the events referred to in this complaint, either negligently, willfully, wantonly, recklessly, tortiously, strictly liable, statutorily liable or otherwise, for the injuries and damages described below to this Plaintiff. Plaintifi will in the filtute seek leave of this coun to show the true names and capacities of these DOE Defendants when it has been ascertained. 6. Hercinafier in the Complaint, unless otherwise specified, reference to a Defendant or Defendants shall refer to all Defendants, and each of them. FACTQAL ALLEGATIONS 7. Defendant Transdev Alternative Services, Inc. (hereafter “Defendant”) hired Plaintiff as a Driver in or about November 2019. 2 COMPLAINT JML LAW A Wham“ 5855 Topanga Canyon Blv&.. Suit: 300 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 \DOONIQM&WNW NNNNNNNNMflpr-‘kuwwm WQmMAwNHOWOO-qmmwap-D Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 8 of 47 8. Plaintiff is a woman. 9. In or about November 2019, Plaintiffteamed that Defendant was paying male drivers in the same position as Plaintifi' at a higher wage rate. Plaintiff alleges that these male employees’ positions required work substantially similar to Plaintiff’s own position as Driver. 10. Specifically, Defendant paid Plaintiffjust $20.00 per hour for her work as a Driver, and Plaintiff learned that Defendant was paying male drivers in the same position and with the same hirc date as her at a rate of $34.50 per hour. 1 l. Plaintiffmade repeated complaints to Human Resources beginning in or about Novembcr 2019 through January 2020 that male drivers in her position were being paid at a higher wage rate, and that she would like to be paid as much as the males in her position. In response, Defendant‘s Human Resources representative informed Plaintiffthat the company would “look into it.” 12. However, Defendant never changed Plaintiff‘s pay rate to close the gender wage gap and continued to pay Plaintiffat the same fate ofpay. 13. During her employment with Defendant, in or about January 2020, her male co- > worker Anthony subjected Plaintiff to sexual remarks on a regular basis. Specifically, Plaintiff's co-worker referred to Plaintiff as a “dick” on a regular basis. 14. The aforementioned harassing conduct was severe and/or pervasive enough to create a work environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive. Plaintiff‘s co-worker Anthony’s conduct interfered with Plaintifi’s work performance and seriously affected her psychological well-being. Plaintiffwas deeply upset this sexually harassing conduct, and considered her work environment to be intimidating, hostile and abusive. 15. Plaintiff repeatedly made it clear to Anthony that his conduct towards her was unwelcome. However, he refused to stop harassing Plaintiff. 16. Plaintiff then complained to Human Resources of these sexual remarks in late January 2020. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges that Defendant failed to conduct a reasonabie and good faith investigation of Plaintiff’s complaint, and failed to take reasonable action to prevent further harassment from occurring. ' 3 COMPLAINT JML LAW 0 PM LII Cum 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd... Suite 300 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 WWQQMAWNH NNNNNNNNMMt‘HHHHHI-‘mm mQO‘.M&th--O\DOO\IO\M&LQNHO Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Documentl-l Filed-Oél-LWQf-fl-W l7. Immediately afier Plaintiffcomplained of these harassing remarks by Anthony, Anthony further harassed Plaintiffby complaining to Human Resumes that Plaintiffhad allegedly ignored the directive arrows in the parking lot while driving. As a result ofAnthony’s harassing complaint, Defendant issued Plaintiffwith written discipline. ~18. 0n or about January 29, 2020, Defendant terminated Plaintifffor pretextual reasons 19. Substantial motivating factors in Plaintifl‘s termination were her complaints of sex harassment and ofgender (sex) discrimination, including ofbeing paid less than male employees in the same position, and her request to be paid as much as her male co-workers in the same position. 20. Plaintiff exhausted her administrative remedies by filing a complaint with the Department of Fair Housing and Empldyment (“DFEH”) against Defendants on March 23, 202 l. The DFEH issued Plaintiff an immediate right-to-sue letter on March 23, 202 l. VIOLATION 0F CALIFORNIA EQUAL PAY ACT (CAL. LABOR CODE § 1197.5) (Against Defendant TRANSDEV and DOES 1 through 50) 21. Plaintiffhereby incorporates by reference and realleges all preceding paragraphs of this complaint as if fully set forth herein. Defendant, at all relevant times, was required to comply with the California Equal Pay Act (Cal. Lab. Code § 1197.5). This law prohibits paying an employee at wage rates less than members ofthe opposite sex for substantially similar work on jobs {he performance ofwhich requires similar skill, efl'ort and responsibility and which are performed under similar working conditions. This law further prohibits an employer for retaliating against an employee for “any action taken by the e'mployee to invoke or assist in any manner” with the enforcement of the California Equal Pay Act. 22. From approximately September 2019 to the present, Defendant willfully violated the California Equal Pay Act by paying Plaintiff at wage rates less than males for substantially similar work on jobs the performance ofwhich requires similar skill, effort and responsibility and which are performed under similar working conditions. 4 COMPLAINT ’ JML LAW AWWW 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 Woodland Hills. CA 91367 \quam-bUINI-t NNNNNNNNMflwmwwuh-umh-I WQQMbWNhOW”~JO\M&NN7-flo Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Documentl-l FiledflMOLZi-EagequL-mm 23. Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that Defendant engaged in a pattcm and practice ofpaying female aggrieved employees a lower wage than males §erforming substantially similar work within the same establishment. 24. Defendant fin-ther willfully violated the California Equal Pay Act by terminating Plaintiff for pretextual reasons aficr Plaintiff complained that a male was being paid a higher wage rate for work substantially similar. to hers, and requested that the pay gap be closed. Substantial motivating factors in Plaintiffs termination were her complaints of sexual harassment and ofsex discrimination in the form of a gender wage gap, and her request to be paid as much as her male co-worker in the same position. 25. As a proximate result of Defendant’s willful, knowing and intentional violation ofthe Califomia Equal Pay Act, Plaintiffhas lost employment earnings and benefits, past and future, according to proof. 26. As a proximate result of Defendant‘s willful, knowing and intentional violation ofthe California Equal Pay Act, Plaintiffhas incurred, and will continue to incur interest, attomeys’ fees and costs. 27. Pursuant to California Labor Code sections 1194.2 and 218.6, Plaintiff is entitled to recover liquidated damages in an amount equal to the wages unlawfully unpaid and interest thereon. 28. Pursuant to California Labor Code Section 218.5, Plaintiff is entitled to recover reasonable attomeys’ fees and costs. ECOND CA 0 ACTION VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA LABOR CODE SECTION 98.6 (Against Defendant TRANSDEV and DOES 1 through 50) 29. Plaintiffhereby repeats and incorporafes all preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 30. At all times mentioned herein California Labor Code § 98.6 ct seq. were in full force and cficct and were binding on Defendants and each of them. S COMPLAINT JML LAW Ammonium. 5855 Taping: Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 Woodland Hills. CA 91367 - \noouoxu-a-wm'v- NNNNNNNMNHMa-owh-Io-tbv-nmo-a WQGUAWNt‘O‘OWQO‘MAUNh-nc Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Documentl-l FiledM-lw- 3 1 . California Labor Code § 98.6 prohibits an employer from retaliating against an employee for exercising any of the rights provided under the Labor Code or Orders of the Industrial Welfare Commission, or because of the exercise by the employee or applicant for employment on behalfof himself, herself, or others ofany rights afforded him or her. 32. A substantial motivating factor in Plaintiffs termination was Plaintiffs aforementioned complaints sex discrimination in the form of a gender wage gap, and her request to be paid as much as her male coeworker in the same position, in violation of califomia Labor ‘ Code§ 98.6. ~ 33. As set forth above, Plaintiffcomplained to Defendant she had learned her niale co» workers were being paid at a higher hourly rate ofpay than her, for the same position. Plaintiff informed Defendant about the disparity. Defendant failed to take any steps t6 close the pay gap. Shortly afier Plaintiff complained ofsex discrimination in the form ofa gender wage gap, Defendant wrongfully terminated Plaintiff for pretexmal reasons. 34. The retaliatory actions ofDefendants were a proximate cause of Plaintiff and aggrieved employees’ damages as stated herein. 35. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts ofDefendants and each ofthem, Plaintiff lost, and will continue to lose, earnings arid benefits and have suffered and/or will suffer other actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, in an amount to be prover: at trial in excess of the jurisdictional minimum of this court. Plaintiff’s claim such amounts as damages together with prejudgmcnt interest pursuant to California Civil Code § 3287 and/or § 3288 and/or any other provision of law providing for prejudgment interest. 35o Pursuant to Labor Code 98.6, Plaintiff is entitled to lost wages and work benefits caused by Defendant’s retaliatory actions. 37- As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts ofDefendants and each of them, Plaintiff has become mentally upset, distressed, embarrassed, humiliated, and aggravated. As a result of the acts of retaliation, Plaintifl‘sufl‘ered harm to her reputation. Plaintiff claims general damages for such manta] and physical distress and aggravation in a sum in exccss of the jurisdictional minimum of this court. 6 COMPLAINT JML LAW Ammmm 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd.. Suit: 300 Wocdhnd Hills. CA 91367 ©00~J¢Mfiwl0~ HO N N N N IO N N N N H H n-I n-o v-s p-a n-o n-n |- W NI m M h U) N h o 0 m \l O‘ M A DJ Is) H Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Documentl-l FHedflGLlle-l-«Eagam 38. Plaintiff is infomed and believes and based thereon alleges that Defendants had in place policies and procedures that specificalbir forbid Dcfcndanb’ managcrs, officers, and agents from retaliating against employees who complained about suspected violations of state and federal laws and regulations, including state and federal wage and hour laws and regulations. Defendants' managers, officers, and/or agents were aware ofDefendants’ policies and procedures prohibiting retaliating in this manner. However, Defendants' managers, officers, and/or agents chose to consciously and willfully ignore said policics and procedures and therefore, their outrageous conduct was fraudulent, malicious, oppressive, and was done in wanton disregard for the rights of Plaintiff, and the rights and duties owed by each Defendant to Plaintiff. Bach Defendant aided, abetted, participated in, authorized, ratified, and/or conspired to engage in the wrongful conduct alleged above. Plaintiff should, therefore, bc awarded exemplary and punitive damages against each Defendant in an amount to be established that is appropriate to punish each Defendant and deter others from engaging in such conduct. 39. Furthennore, Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Defendants engaged in a pattern and practice of terminating and/or otherwise retaliating against and harassing employees that complained about violations of California and/or federal wage and hour laws. Defendants engaged in this conduct instead of informing whistleblowing employees of their protections under the law and implementing a plan to protect them fiom retaliation and harassment. _ 40. The aforementioned willful and outrageofis conduct ofeach Defendant was fraudulent, malicious, oppressive, and was done in wanton disregard for the rights ofPlaintiff and the rights and duties owed by each Defendant to Plaintiff. Each Defendant aided, abetted, participated in, authorized, ratified, and/or conspired to engage in the wrongful conduct alleged above. Plaintiff should, therefore, be awarded exemplary and punitive damages against each Defendant in a.n amount to be atablished that is appropriate to punish each Defendant and deter others from engaging in such conduct. // // 7 COMPLAINT JML LAW A mmw 5855 Top-nga Canyon Blvd.. Suite 300 Woodland Hills. CA 91 367 \OWQOM&WNn-n NNNNNNNNN-er-Iwr-‘Hn-awu‘ mfiam¥m-°em~lmm¥mpflo Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 13 of 47 0F ACTION ‘ GENDER (SEX)mscnmmATmN 1N VIOLATION 0F CAL GOVT. CODE § 12940 (a) [FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT (FEHA)! (Against Defendant TRANSDEV and DOES l through 50) 41 . Plaintiffhereby repeats and incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 42. At all times herein mentioned, FEHA, Govemment Code §12940 ct seq.. was in full force and effect and binding on Defendant. This statute requires Defendant to refiain from discriminating against any employee on the basis of sex (i.e., gender). ' 43. During Plaintiff’s employment with Defendant, Defendant, through its agents, managers, supervisors and employees, discriminatgd against Plaintiffbecause ofher gender (female) by treating her less favorably in the terms and conditions ofher employment, including by paying her less than her male cdunterpart for the same position/for performing the same work same work, and by terminating her in retaliation for her complaint ofgender (sex) discrimination in the form of a gender wage gap. 44. As a proximate result ofthe aforesaid acts ofDefendants, Plaintiff has sufi’ered actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without limitation, loss of salary and benefits, and {11c intmgible loss ufemployment telated oppormnities in her field and damage lo her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. Plaintiff claims such amounts as damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 3287 and/or § 3288 and/or any. other provision oflaw providing for prejudgment interest. 45. As a proximate result of the wrongfixl acts of Defendants, Plaintiffhas suffered and continues to sufier emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and embarrassman as well as the manifestation ofphysical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional suffering for a period in the future not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. 46. As a proximate result 0fthe wrongfial acts ofDefendants, Plaintiff has been forced to ' hire attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is expected to continue to 8 . COMPLAINT JML LAW AWWW 5855 Topanga Cmyon Blvd., Suite 300 Woodland Hills, CA 91 3.67 \OMQOSMhWN-n NNNMNNNNMug-Huwuwmuu mgmMAWN~°WWNJ@M&WN|-'o Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 14 0f 47 incur attnmeys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is entitled to recnver attomeys’ fees and costs under California Government Code § 12965(b). 47. Defendant had in place policies and procedures that specificaliy prohibited and required Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents to prevent gender (sex) discrimination against and upon employees of Defendant. Defendant’s managers, officers, and/or agents were aware ofDefendant’s policies and procedures requiring Defendant’s managers. officers, and agents to prevent, and investigate claims ofgender (sex) discrimination against and upon employees ofDefendant. Furthennore, Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents maintained broad discretionary powers regarding stafl'mg, managing, hiring, firing, contracting, supervising, assessing and establishing ofcorporate policy and practice in the Defendant‘s facilities. However, Defendant’s managers, omcers, and agents chose to consciously and willfully ignpre said policies and procedures and therefore, their outrageous conduct was fraudulent, malicious, oppxessive, and was done in wanton disregard for the rights of Plaintiff and the rights and duties owed by each Defendant to Plaintiff. Each Defendant aided, abetted, participated in, authorized, ratified, and/or conspired to engage in the wrongful conduct alleged above. Plaintiff should, therefore, be awarded exemplary and punitive damages against each Defendant in an amount to be established that is appropriate to punish each Defendant and deter others from engaging in. such conduct. FOURTH CAQ§E QF ACTION SEX HARASSMENT IN VIOLATION OF GOVT. CODE §§ 12940 ETSEQ. {FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING ACT (FEHAH (Against Defendant TRANSDEV and DOES 1 through 50) 48. Plaintiffhereby repeats and incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fiJlly set forth herein. ' 49. At all times herein mentioned, California Government Code§ 12940 ct seq., was in full force and effect and was binding on Defendants, as Defendants regularly employed five (5) or more persons. The conduct ofDefendants, as herein described above, constitutes sexual harassment in violation ofCalifornia Government Code § 129406). The harassment complained 9 COMPLAINT 5855 Topanga Canyon B!vd.. Suite 300 Woodhnd Hills, CA 91367 NNNNNNNNN-ih-IMHH-In‘t-u- OOQO\M&WNHO\OODQO\U\#WNHO WMQGMhUNv-o Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 15 of 47 ofwas based on sex and the harassment complained ofwas sufficiently severe and/or pervasive so as to alter the conditions of employment and create an abusive working environman 50. Throughout her employment with Dcfcndant’s agents subjected Plaintiff to sexual remarks on a regular basis. 51. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts ofDefendants, Plaintiffhas suffered actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without limitation, loss of salary and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related opportunities in her field and damage to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. Plaintiff claims such amounts as damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 3287 and/or § 3288 and/or any other provision of law providing for prejudgment interest. $2. As a proximate result ofthe wrongfial acts ofDefendants, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and embarrassment. as well as the manifestation ofphysical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges that. she will continue tn cxpcricnce said physical and emotional suffering for a period in the mture not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. 53. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, Plaintiffhas been forced to hire attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is expected to continue to incur attumeys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is cntilled t0 recover atiomeys‘ fees and costs under California Government Code § 12965(b). 54. Defendant had in place policies and procedures that Specifically prohibited and required Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents to prevent sex harassment/hostile work environment agains}. and upon employccs ofDefendant. Dcfendant’s managers, officers, and/nr agents were aware of Defendant’s policies and procedures requiring Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents to prevent, and investigate claims of sexual harassment/hostile work environment against and upon employees of Defendant. Furthermore, Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents maintained broad discretionary powers regarding staffing, managing, hiring, firing, contracting, supervishlg, assessing and establishing ofcommute policy and practice in the Defendant’s facilities. However, Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents chose to 10 COMPLAINT JML LAW nmmcm 5855- Toplngn Cnnyon Blvd., Suite 300 Woodland Hills. CA 91 367 \OWQQM&WNo-- NNNNMNNNNHH-nHI-Io-u-HH-u WNthWN-G‘OWQGM&UNMO Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1-1 FiIPd 06/10/71 Pagp 16 nf A7 consciously and willfimy ignore said policies and procedures and therefore, their outrageous conduct was fraudulent, malicious, oppressive, and was done in wanton disregard for the rights of Plaintiff and the rights and duties owed by each Defendant to Plaintiff. Each Defendant aided, abetted, participated in, authorized, ratified, and/or conspired to engage in the wrongful conduct alleged above. Plaintiff should, therefore, be awarded 'exemplaxy and punitive damages against cach Defendant in an amount to be established that is appmpriatc to punish each Defendant and deter others fi-om engaging in such conduct FIFTH CAUSE QF AQTIQN I . FAILURE T0 PREVENT DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT 1N VIOLATION OF FEHA (Against Defendant TRANSDEV and DOES l through 50) 55. Plaintiffhereby repeats and incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 56. At all times mentioned herein, California Government Code Sections 12940, ct seq., including but not limited to Sections 12940 (i) and (k), were in full force and effect and were binding upon Defendants and each ofthem. These sections impose on an employer a duty to take immediate and appmpriatc corrective action to cnd discrimination and harassment and take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent discrimination and harassment fiom occurring, among othcr things. S7. Plaintiff is infomed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Defendant knew about employee Anthony’s sexually harassing actions, but did not discipline him or take any action to prevent further harassment fiom occurring. . 58. Defendant violated Government Code § 12940 (j) and (k) by failing to adequately supervise, control, discipline, and/or otherwise penalize the conduct, acts, and failures to act as described herein. 59. Defendant failed to fulfill its statutory duty to timely take immediate and appropriate corrective action to end the discrimination and harassment and also failed to take all reasonable steps necessary to prevent the harassment from occurring. I l COMPLAINT JML LAW Amwmm 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd.. Suite 300 Woodland Hills. CA 9| 367 Omflafiukwnhfl N N N N M N N N N H H H H u-a u-t n-a a-a H' H 00 '4 O‘ VI A U) N H O \O m \I 0‘ M b W N H D Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 17 of 47 60. In failing and/or refusing to take immediate and appmpriate corrective action to end the discn'mination harassment, and in failing and/or refusing to take and or all reasonable steps necessary to prevent harassment from occurring, Defendant violated California Government Codc§ 12940 (i) and (k), causing Plaintiff to suffer damages as set forth above. 61. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts ofDefendants, and each ofthem, Plaintiff has suffered actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without limitation, loss ofsalary and benefits, and the intangible loss ofemployment related opportunities in her field and damage to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. Plaintifi‘ claims such amounts as damages pursuant to Civil dee § 3287 and/or § 3288 and/or any other provision oflaw providing for prejudgment interest. 62. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, and each ofthem, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and embarrassment, as well as the manifestation ofphysical symptoms. Plaintiff is informcd and believes and thereupon alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional suffering for a period in the future not presently ascenainable, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. 63. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, and each ofthem, Plaintiff has been forced to hire attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is expected to continue to incur attomeys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is entitled to recover attomeys' fees and costs under California Government Code § [2965(b). 64. Defendant had in place policies and procedures that specifically prohibited and required Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents to prevent sex harassment/hostile work environment against and upon employees of Defendant. Defendant’s managers, officers, and/or agents were aware of Defendant’s policies and procedures requiring Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents to prevent, and investigate claims of sexual harassment/hostile work environment against and upon employees ofDefendant. Furthermore, Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents maintained broad discretionary powers regarding staffing, managing, hiring, firing, contracting, supervising, assessing and establishing of coxporate policy and practice in the 12 COMPLAINT JML LAW $855 Topanga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 Woodland Hills, CA 91 367 ODOQQLAhWNu-n NNNNNNNNqu-HHHHt-AMHH mQONLh-hWNn-OwW‘detnéUJMV-oo Case 5:21-CV-O4499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page l8 Of 47 Defendant’s facilities. However, Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents chose to consciously and willfully ignore said policies and procedures and therefore, their onwageous conduct was fraudulent, malicious, oppressive, and was done in wanton disregard for the rights of Plaintiffand the rights and duties owed by each Defendant to Plaintiff. Each Defendant aided, abetted, participated in, authorized, ratified, and/or conspired to engage in the wrongful conduct alleged above. Plaintiff should, therefore, be awarded exemplary and punitive damages against each Defendant in in amount to be established that is appropriate to punish each Defendant and deter others fiom engaging in such conduct. SETH CAUSE C N RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF FEHA (Against Defendant TRANSDEV and DOES 1 through 50) 65. Plaintiff hereby repeats and incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth 1min. ' 66. At all times herein mentioned, California Government Code § 12940 ct seq. was in full force and effect and was binding on Defendants, as Defendants regularly employed five or more persons. California Govcmment Code § 1294001) makes it unlawful for any person to retaliate against an employee who has engaged in protected activity under the FEHA, including complaining about sexual harassment and complaints regarding equal pay. 67. Defendant’s conduct, as alleged above, constituted unlawful retaliation in violation of California Goément Code. § 1294001). 68. As a proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants, and each of them, Plaintiff has suffered actual, consequential and incidental financial losses, including without limitation, loss of salary and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related opportunities in her field and damage to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to proofat the time of tn‘al. Plaintiffclaims such amounts as damages pursuant to Civil Code § 3287 and/or§ 3288 and/or any other provision oflaw providing for prejudgment interest. 69. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts ofDcfcndants, and each ofthem, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and 13 COMPLAINT JML LAW nmmmcmsm 5855 Taping: Canyon Blvd, Suite 300 Woodland Hills. CA 91367 N N N N N N N N. N H v-I N H H H |- u-t nu n-I m \l O\ M A U) N M O \O W *4 m M A W N F‘ O xooo~go~u4am- Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1‘1 Filed 06/10/71 P299 1Q nf A7 embarrassment, as well as the manifestation of physical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional suffering for a period in the fimture not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof at thc time of trial. 70. As a proximate result ofthe wrongful acts of Defendants, and each ofthem, Plaintiff has been forced to hire attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is expected to continue to incur attomcys‘ fees and costs in connection therewith. Plaintiff is entitled to recover attomeys’ fees and costs under California Government Code § 12965(b). 71 . Defendant had in place policigs and procedures that specifically prohibited and required Defendant's managers, officers, and agents to prevent retaliatidn for complaints of gender (sex) discrimination and sexual harassment against and upon employees of Defendant. Defendant‘s managers, officers, and/or agents were aware of Defendant’s policies and procedures requin'ng Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents to prevent retaliation for complaints ofgender (sex) discrimination and sexual harassment against and upon employees of Defendant. Furthermore, Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents maintained broad discretionary powers regarding staffing, managing, hiring, firing, contracting, supervising, assessing and establishing of corporate policy and practice in the Defendant’s facilities. However, Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents chose to consciously and willfully ignore said policies and procedures and therefore, their outrageous conduct was fraudulent, malicious, oppressive, and was done in wanton disregard for the rights ofPlaintiff and the rights and duties owed by each Defendant to Plaintiff. Each Defendant aided, abetted, participated in, authorized, ratified, and/or conspired to engage in the wrongful conduct alleged above. Plaintiff should, therefore, be awarded exemplary and punitive damages against each Defendant in an amount to be established that is appropriate to punish each Defendant and deter others fiom engaging in such conduct. l/ // // 14 COMPLAINT JML LAW "murmu- 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd.. Suite 300 Woodland Hills. CA 91367 ”WQGMbUNv-A NNNNNNNNNHHHHHHHHh-o-I man-kuNHC‘OmNGMbWNI-‘o Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 20 of 47 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION WAITING TIME PENALTIES (CAL. LABOR CODE §§ 201 THROUGH 203) (Against Defendant TRANSDEV and DOES 1 through 50) 72. Plaintiffhereby repeats and incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 73. Labor Code § 201 requires the immediate payment ofwages earned and unpaid at the time ofan employee’s discharge or layoff. 74. Labor Code § 203, subdivision (a), states that ifan employer willfully fails to pay, without abatement or reduction, in accordance with Sections 201 and 202, inter alia, any wages ofan employee who is discharged or who quits, “the wages of the employee shall continue as a penalty from the due date thereof at the same rate until paid or until an action therefor is commenced; but the wages shall not continue for more than 30 days.” 75. Labor Code § 203, subdivision (b) status: “Suit may be filed for these penalties at any time before the expiration of the statute of limitations on an action for the wages from which the penalties arise.” 76. During the relevant period, Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiffeamed and unpaid wages set forth above, either at the time of discharge, or within seventy-two (72) hours of her leaving Defendants’ employ. These actions were in violation ofCalifornia Labor Code sections 201 and 202. 77. Based on Defendants' conduct as alleged herein, Defendants are liable to Plaintiff for statutory penalties pursuant to California Labor Code § 203. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to recover from Defendants the statutory penalty wage for each day they were not paid, up to a thirty (30) day maximum, pursuant to California Labor Code § 203. I/ ll // l/ l 5 COMPLAINT JML LAW ammw 5855 Topaaga Canyon Blvd, Suite 300 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 \OW‘JO\M#UN- NNNNMMMMN-~HHH’-__ coucnmaww~osooo~aa~ma~w-o Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 21 of 47 EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTIOE UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES PURSUANT TO CAL. BUSINESS & PROFESSIONS CODE §§ 17200, ETSEQ. (Against Defendant TRANSDEV and DOES 1 through 50) 78. Plaintiff hereby repeats and incorporates all preceding paragraphs as though fully set forth herein. 79. Plaintifihereby brings a claim for Unfair Business Practices against Defendants pursuant to California Business and Professions Code §§ 17200, et seq. The conduct of Defendants as alleged in this Complaint has bccn and continues to be unfair, unlawful, and harmfixl to Plaintiff, aggrieved employees, and the general public. Plaintifi‘ and aggrieved employees seek to enforce important rights affecting the public interest within the meaning of California Code ofCivil Procedure § 1021 .5. ‘ 80. California Business and Professions Code §§ 17200, et seq., prohibit unlawful and unfair business practices. Plaintiffand aggn'eved employers arc “persons” within the meaning of California Business and Professions Code § 17204, and therefore have standing to bring this cause of action for injunctivc relief, restitution, and other appropriate equitable remedies. 8 l. California Labor Code § 905(3) articulates the public policies of this state to enforce vigorously minimum labor standards, to ensure that employees are not required or permitted to work under substandard and unlawful conditions and to protect law-abiding employers and their employees from competitors who lower their costs by failing to comply with minimum labor standards. 82. Through the conduct alleged in this Complaint, Defendants have acted contrary to these public policies, have violated specific provisions of the California Labor Code, and have engaged in other unlawful and unfair business practices in violation of California Business and Profession Code §§ 17200 et seq., depriving Plaintiff and aggrieved employees of rights, benefits, and privileges guaranteed to all employees under the law. 83. Defendants’ conduct, as alleged hereinabove, constituted unfair competition in violation of sections 17200, et seq. 16 COMPLAINT JML LAW A raw x.- Com 5855 Topauga Canyon Blvd., Suite 300 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 waO\M#wN'-* NNNNNNNNNHHHMHuH-NH quMwawommqumAMMu-‘o Case 5:21-CV-04499-NC Document 1-1 FiledQEHOQL-Page-Z-Eeilfl-w 84. Defendants, by engaging in the conduct herein alleged, such as intentionally failing to pay Plaintiffher earned wages, either knew or in the exercise ofreasonable care should have lmown that the conduct was unlawml. ‘ 85. As a proximate result ofthe above mentioned acts ofDefendants, Plaintifl‘and agmeved' employees are entitled to rwtitution for all ofDefendant’s ill-gotten gains. 86. Unless restrained by this Conn, Plaintiffbelieves Defendants will continue to engage in the unlan conduct as alleged above. Pursuant to the California Business and Professions Code, this Court should make such orders orjudgments, including the appointment of a receiver, as may be necessary to prevent the use or cmpléymcnt, by Defendants, its agents or employees, of any unlawfixt or deceptive business practice, disgorgement of profits which may be necessary to restore to Plaintiff and aggrieved employees the money Defendants have unlawfully failed to pay them. 87. Plaintiff fimhcr seeks attorney’s fees pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 102 1.5. 88. Plaintiff also requests relief as described below. NINTH CAUSE 0F ACTION WRONGFUL TERMINATION IN VIOLATION 0F PUBLIC POLICY (Against Defendant TRANSDEV and DOES 1 through 50) 89. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth at this piace. 90. "[W]hen an employer's discharge ofan employee violates fundamental principles of public policy, the discharged employee may maintain a tort action and recover damages traditionally available in such actions." Tameny v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (1980) 27 Cal.3d 167, 170 "[T]he cases in which violations ofpublic policy are found generally fall into four categories: (1) refusing to violate a statute; (2) performing a statutory obligation (3) exercising a statutory n'ght or privilege; and (4) reporting an alleged violation ofa statute ofpublic importance." Gantt v. Scntry Insurance (1992) l Cal.4th 1083. 1090-1091. Similarly, "an employer‘s authority over its employee does not include the right to demand that the employee l7 COMPLAINT JML LAW n mmm Won 5855 Taping: Canyon Blvd.. Suite 300 Woodhnd Hilts. CA 91367 WOOQGLA‘hh-DNH ~NNNMNNNN- --- mqo~uam-omm35$hw~w5 Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1~1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 23 of 47 commit a criminal act to further its interests, and an employer may not coerce compliance with such unlawful directions by discharging an employce who refuses to follow s'uch an order . . ." Tameuy, supra, 27 Cal.3d at p. 178. 91. The public policy of the State of California is designed to protect all employees and to promote the welfare and well-being ofthe community at large. Accordingly, the actions of Defendants, and each of them, in terminating Plaintiffon the grounds alleged and described herein were wrongful and in contravention of the express public policy ofthe State of California. In this case, Plaintiffwas terminated because she filed a compléint regarding the harassment and discrimination she was receiving, and because she complained that males in her position were being paid at a higher wage rate than her for substantially similar work, which is expressly conuary to public policy. 92. As a proximate result ofthe aforesaid acts ofDefendants, and each ofthem, Plaintiff has sufi‘ered actual, consequential and incidental financial Ioéses, including without limitation, loss of salary and benefits, and the intangible loss of employment related opportunities in her field and damage to her professional reputation, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of tn'al. Plaintifl' claims such amounts as damages pursuant to Civil Code § 3287 and/or § 3288 and/or any other provision of law providing for prejudgment interest. 93. As a proximate result of the wrongfixl acts ofDefendants, and cash ofthem, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, mental anguish and embarrassment, as well as the manifestation of physical symptoms. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that she will continue to experience said physical and emotional suffering for a period in the futur_e not presently ascertainable, all in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. 94. As a proximate result of the wrongful acts of Defendants, and each ofthem, Plaintiff has been forced to hire attorneys to prosecute her claims herein, and has incurred and is cxpectcd to continue to incur attomeys’ fees and costs in connection therewith. 95. Defendants ha‘d in place policies and proccdures that specifically required Defendant’s managers, officers, and agents to prevent discrimination agaitist and upon 1 8 COMPLAINT m \DW‘QO‘M&UJN HH‘I-i NMO HHH th JML LAW Ammam 5855 Topanga Canyon Blvd.. Suite 300 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 N N N N N N 'N N M w u-t m \I 0‘ u k w N H Q W W \J °\ N 00 Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1:1 Hedfiél-LOLA-Eage 24 0f 47 employees of Defendants. However, Defendants chose to consciously and willfully ignore said policies and procedures and therefore, their outrageous conduct was fiaudulcnt, malicious, oppressive, and was done in wanton disregard for the rights of Plaintiffand the rights and dutix owed by each Defendant to Plaintiff. Defendants also had a pattern and practice of discriminating against employees. Each Defendant aided, abetted, participated in, authorized, ratified, and/or conspired to engage in the wrongful conduct alleged above. Plaintiff should, therefore, be awarded exemplary and punitive damages against each Defendant in an amount to be established that is appropriate to punish each Defgndant and deter others from engaging in such coriduct in the future. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff and aggrieved employees pray for judgment as follows: 1. For general damages, according to proof; For special damages, according to proof; For loss of earnings, according to proof; For civil penalties under Labor Code sections 98.6, 1197.5, 210 For declaratory relief, according to proof; For attomeys’ fees, according to proof; For prejudgment interest, according to proof; For costs of suit incurred hercin; For liquidated damages pursuant to Cal. Labor Code § 1197.5(g); 99°89‘9pr For applicable statutory penalties including those pursuant to GaLLabor Code §226(e); and ll. For such other relief that the Court may deem just and proper. 9-- .0 // // ll I/ 19 COMPLAINT JML LAW A Ptofammlhvm 5855 Topfing: Culyon Blvd., Suite 300 Woodhnd Hills, CA 91367 \OWQGM&WNH NNNMNNNNNn-tmo-nr-p-MHI-ap-m WNGMhWN”C\OWNO\M&WNHO Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 25 of 47 . D MAN!) FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiffhereby demands ajury trial. DATED: April 7, 2021 JML LAW, A Professional Law Corporation By: 2 a . I: . 2 2 g z JOSEPH M. LOVRETOVICH ERIC M. GRUZEN CHRISTINA R. MANALO Attorneys for Plaintifi 20 COMPLAB‘IT Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/91 Page 76 nf 47 ' Chum 451E? 5?“??firfimvich? En W'W'E'm'w zen-ffi-flnstma Rfi'fiialo (73403; 222443; 29711 8) m“WW" °"“' 5833309311 “CagxonmBoulevard, Suite 300 an 1:, mmmm. 818) 610.8800 mo. (818£610~303o Shcmnicafly Ffled ‘ .mysoam, laintiff, KIMBERLY WICKLAND R y Superior Court of CA. Isupemoacwarorcmm.comm or SANTA CLARA ounty of Santa Clara.WTWSS: I91 Nonh First Street n 41712021 9:34 AM MAILING ADDRESS: 191 North First Street mmbzpm: Sm Jose CA 95113 eviewed By: Y. Chavezamm; DOWNTOWN - CIVIL DIVISION 35° “10/331733W nvelope: 618981 5 WICKLANDER v. TRANSDBV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC. CW"- CASE COVER SHEET Complex Case Designation m5WCV381 733 xx? D {magi D Counter D Joindor demanded demanded is Filed with fitst appearance by defendant JUDGE: exceeds 325.000) $25,000 or less) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.402) DEW: Items 1-6 below must be completed (see instmclions on page 2). 1. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case: Auto Tort C tract Ptovlslonally Complex Civil Litigntlcn Amo (22) é Bfgam ofcomramnangy (06) (COL RUIOI of con".mm 3.m.403)- Uninsured moms: (4s) ma 3.740 commas (09) D Antitmsvrrada regulation (oz) cumPmmo(9mm: mjurywropeny omer conecuons (cs) g Construction detect (1o)WWMOM 0mm 7°" Immense coverage (1a) - Mm :on (40) ”“8”“ w“) D Other contract (37) D Socumsas Imgauon (23) Product liabilitym) mummy E3 amironmmmxncmao) mac" ””9”” (‘5) D 5mm“ "Omaw'mm" D tnsuranoe coverage daims arising from the Other PIIPDNVO (23) condemnation (14) above listed provisionally complex case Nonmolwn (cum) ton a WWIWW (33) “'9” 0' ) BusinessWm“, bush,“ mew“ (o7) D Other real property (26) Enfommnm of Judgment cm rights (cs) unlawful 0mm: D Enforcement ofjudgmem (20) Defamaaon (1a) Commercial (31) Miscaumoous csvu complaint mucus) Residenuauaz) E] meow) Intellectual property (19) Owes (38) D omercompmnt (not spanned abovemz) Pmssmna' “99mm” (25) diam Mi." Miscellanea: CM! Petition omar nan-PIIPDIWD ton (35) E A38“ forfeflum (05) Partnetship and corporate governance (21)Ed'm‘m Pam" '6‘“mm" award m) D Other petition (not specified above) (43) Wrongtus termination (as) D wm of mandate (02)D Other omptoyment (15) E] Otherindium review (39) 2. This case D is E] is not complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court. If the case is complex. mark the factors requiring exception! iudiciai management: a.D Large number of separately represented patties d.D Large number oi witnesses b.D Extensive motion practice raising difficult or nova! e.D Coordination with {elated actions pending in one or more courts issues that will be timeoconsuming to resolve in o(her counties. states. or countries. or in a federal court c.D Substantiai amountof documentary evidence f. D Substantial postjudgment judiciai supervision 3. Remedies sought (check allthatapply): am monetary hm nonmanelary: declaratory or injunctive relief c. Dpunnive 4. Number of causes of acflon (specify): 9 5 This case D is is not a class action suit. If there are any known related cases. me and serve a notice of related case. (You may use form CM-O 15.) Date: 4/7/2021 Eric M. Gruzen; Christina R. Manalo t C Egg £1“ m‘a: g % 14°é(TYPE OR PRNT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTYm ATTORNEY F PARW) NOTICE o Plaintiff must file this cover sheet with the first paper filed in the action or proceeding (except smau claims casas or cases filed under tho Probate Code, Family Code, orWeifare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court. rule 3.220.) Failure to file may result in sanctions. 0 File this cover sheet in addition to Iny cover sheet required by Iocal court rule. o If this case is complex under rule 3.400 at seq. of the California Rules of Court. you must serve a copy of this cover sheet on all other parties to the action or proceeding. 0 Unless this is a collections case under ruke 3.740 or a complex case. this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes only. ,m 9 0 Wufimgu cum. CASE COVER SHEET “WWwmuim cu-OIO {Ram July 1. 2001} WWW a.gov Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filpd 06/10/91 Page: 77 nf 47 INSTRUCTIONS ON HOWTO COMPLETE THE COVER SHEET cm'mo To Plaintiffs and Others Flllng First Papers. If you are filing a first paper (for example. a complaint) in a civil case, you must complete and file. aiong with your first paper. the Civil Case Cover Sheet contained on page 1. This information will be used to compile statistics about the types and numbem of cases flied. You must complete items 1 through 6 on the sheet. In item 1. you must check one box for the case type lhat best describes the case. If the case fits both a general and a more specific type of ease tisted in Item 1, check the more specific one. If the case has muttlple causes of action. check the box that best indicates the primary cause of action To assist you in completing Ihe sheet. examples of the cases mat belong under each case type in item 1 are provided below. A covet sheet must be flied only with your initial paper. Failure to file a cover sheet with the first paper filed in a civil case may subject a party. its counsel. or both to sanctions under rules 2.30 and 3.220 of the California Rules of Court. To Patties in Rah 3.740 Collections Cases. A 'collectlons case“ under rule 3.740 is defined as an action for recovery of money owed In a sum stated to be certain mat ls not more than $25,000. exclusive of interest'and attorney's fees. atising from a transaction in which properly. services. or money was acquired on credit. A collections case does not Include an action seeking the following: (1) ton damages. (2) punitive damages. (3) recovery of real propeny. (4) reoovety of personal properly. or (5) a prejudgmem writ of attachment. The identification of a case as a rule 3.740 collections case on this form means that it will be exempt [mm the genera! time-for-setvice requirements and case management rules. unless a defendant mes a responsive pieading. A ruIe 3.740 collections case will be subject to the requirements for service and obtaining a judgment in ruIe 3.740. To Parties In Comp!“ Cu». tn complex cases only, parties must also use the Civil Case Cover Shoe! to designate whether the case is compiex. If a plaintiff believes the case is complex under lute 3.400 of the California Rules of Court. this must be Indicated by complains the approprma boxes in items 'l and 2. If a plaintiff dcaignotoo a woo no complex. the cover shoot must be sewed with tho complaint on ail parties to the action. A defendant may file and serve no later than the time of its first appearance a jolnder in the ptaintifrs designation. a counter-designation Ina! the case is not complex, or. if the plaintiff has made no designation. a designation that the case is complex. CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES Auto Tort Comma! Provblonally Complox CMI LMgatlon (Cat. Auto (ZZWersonal tnjurylepeny Breach of CommIWau-ramy (06) Ruins of Court Rules 3M0-8.403) Oamage/Wrongful Death Breach of RentallLeaso Anmmstn’rade Regulation (03) Unmmw Mom“ (45) (1m). Contract (not unlawful dolainer Construction Dated (10) case involves an uninsnrad WWIOWN) cm ‘MMMMfls 7°“ (4°) motorist def,"wow go ContracUWmnty Broach-Selor Sacuritias ngatlon (23) arbitration, chad; (ms [gem Plaintiff (not fraud ornegligence) Environmentalfl'oxic Tort (30) instead emu“) Negleont Breach of Contract! lnsurnpe Cgverage C’sims” ”aOthermama Pemnal In I minty ansina mmpm one y com x progeny pumggmngmlmm) Other Breach of ConuacWVarranIy casa lypa listed abovo) (41) Tan Collections (9.9.. money owed. open Eniocmm of Judgment Asbestos (o4) book accounts) (09) Enforcement of Judgment (20) “haste; progeny Damage Couection Casa-Seflet Plaintiff Abstract of Judgment (Out of Asbestos Personal Injury] Other Proméssory NoteIConections Coupty) wrong” Deg", Case I Contesscon of Judgment (non- pmdmtWW (m“Mos o, Insurance Coverage (not provisvonally Wk"mm” wximwmmmmm) complex) (18) Sistersme Judgment Medical Malpractice (4s) Mu Summon Administrative Agency Award Medina! Malpractico- 0m"WWW {Igor unpafd taxes) Physicians a surgeons Other Contract (37) Pefihorvcmficafion 0! Entry of omor Professions Health Care Contractuat Fraud Judgment on Unpa-d Taxes Malpmwa 0mg; emu“: Dispute omecr Entomemem of Judgment Other PIIPDIWD (23) Real Property 35° Premisas [Jammy (eg.. slip Eminent Domainnmerse Mltcflhnms CM! Complaint and tau) Condemnation (14) RICOW) nmenaonat Bodily Injurylpomo Wrongfu: Eviction (33) wgbcogmgg (not specified (6.0.. assent. vandalism) Other Real P o. ., met me 26 Intenflonal Inflicflow wmotpysgzgéngcgw ngo‘ny) ngg'ggfl‘ofemy EMOflOflfl D.SUOSS Mongage Foyecbsur. “jun: n y (non' Negugeniutznnmot cumm. mcéggmgo 0 0M "€35 Other Real Pro e not eminent . om, pupomo 4mm. landbfm'ggml o, Other Commrcuai Compiaint Non-FIIPDMD (Other) Ton toteclasuro) omsacmf'gowwgfinww Business ToniUnfair Business Unlawful Detalner (mwgfwmp’ex)Pram (07) 0mm" ‘3” Miscellaneous Civil Petition Civil Rights (9.9.. diminution. Residenuauaz) pmmmmp“Comm false amst) (notdvlf Drugs (sauirme casainvotvus mega: Gmmmm)Mmmo (03) drugs, chock this item. otherwise. 0mg, pump" (no:mumDahmafim (0-9» S'ifldfl- "be” mpodas Commerclal or Residential) am”) (43) (13) Judicial Review cm Ham'smem Frau“ "8) A53“ FDF'CI'UW (05) Wampum Violence Intel‘ectuai Prom (19) Petition Re. Arbitration Award (1 1) ‘ emmamdamAM Professional Negllgance (25) Writ of Mandate (02) Abuse Legal Malpractice Wdt-Admlmstrative Mandamus gem" come” Other Professional Malpractice Wdt-Mandamus on Limited Court Pam f Na c (00! medical 0’ ’99”) Case Matter Pam's: f: Reg: thzznfito Emma? Nton~PlIPDIWD Tort (35) wm-omer Limited Conn Case Wm on . wrong““mam" (36’ OtherJmal Review 39) om"cm Penna“ Other Employment (15) Reviaw of Health oer Order cumo (aw. My 1. mun Notice of Appeal-LaborCW CIVIL. CASE COVER SHEET nu. z 0t! Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 28 of 47 21CV381733 Santa Clara - CM! ATTACHMENT CV-SOVZChfive-Y CIVIL LAWSUIT NOTICE Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara CASE NUMBER: 2‘CV3“ 733 191 North First St, San José, CA 95113 PLEASE READ THIS ENTIRE FORM INHFF (the person suing): Within 60 days after filing the lawsuit. you must serve each Defendant with the Complaint, Summons. an Akemative Dispute Resohuion (ADR) Information Sheet. and a copy of this Civil Lawsw? Notice. and you must file Mitten proof of such service.W (The person sued): You must do each of the following to protect your rights: . You must file a written response to the Complaint. using the proper legal form or format, in the Clerk’s Office of the Court. within 30 days of the date you were sewed with the Summons and Complaint, . You must serve by mail a copy of your written response on the Plaintiffs attorney or on the Plaintiff if Plaintiff has no attorney (to “setve by mail” means to have an adult otherthan yourself mail a copy); and . You must attend the first Case Management Conference. Warning: l! you. as the Defendant, do not foilow these Instructions. you may automatically lose this case. gums AND Fm: You must foilow the California Rules of Court and the Superior Court of California, County of <_CountyName_> Local Civil Rules and use proper forms. You can obtain legal information. view the rules and receive forms. free of charge, from the Self-Help Center at 201 North First Street. San José (408-882-2900 x-2926). - State Rules and Judicial Counci! Forms: www.courtinfosagovflormg and www.courtinfomgovlmlgg I Local Rules and Forms: httgdlwwwsccsgggg‘ rgggnomlcivillrulefloahtm CA§§ MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE m0); You must meet with the other parties and discuss the case. in person or by telephone at least 30 caiendar days before the CMC. You must also fl" out. file and serve a Case Management Statement (Judicial Council form CM-1 10) at least 15 calendar days before the CMC. You oryour attorney must appear a! tho CMC. You may ask to appear by telephone - see Local Civil Rule 8.Wt Your Case Management Judge is: Department: The 1“ CMC Is scheduled for: (Completed by Clerk of Court) Date: 08/24/2021 Time: 3145p!“ in Department: 19 The next CMC Is scheduled for: (Completed by pany if the 1" CMC was continued or has passed) Date: Time: in Department: ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADM: If all parties have appeared and flied a completed ADR Stipulation Form (local form CV-5008) at least 15 days before the CMC the Court will cance! the CMC and man notice of an ADR Status Conference Vsit the Court's website at www sgggugeflgcourt.ammofl or call the ADR Administrator (408-882-2100 x-2530) for a list of ADR providers and their qualifications. services. and fees WARNING: Sanctions may be imposed if you do not follow the California Rules of Court or the Local Rules of Coutt cv-smz Revwows CIVIL LAWSUIT NOTICE rag- 1 on Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Documentl-l FileéQ-QML-fiw SANTA CLARA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION INFORMATION SHEET Many cases can be resolved to the satisfaction of afl parties without the necessity of traditional litigation. which can be expensive, time consuming. and suessful. The Court finds that it is in the best interests of the parties that they participate in attematlves to traditionat litigation. Including arbitration. mediation. neutral evaluation. specie! masters and reierees. and semement conferences. Therefore. all mattets shall be referred to an appropriate form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) before they are set formal. unless theta is good cause to dispense \m'th the ADR requirement. What Is ADR? ADR is the general term tot a wide variety of dispute tesolution processes that are alternatives to litigation. Types of ADR processes indude mediation. arbitration. neutral evaluation, specie! masters and referees, and settlement conferences, among others forms. Whatm the advantages ofchoosing ADR Instead of litigation? ADR can have a number of advantages over litigafion: o ADR can save time. A dispute can be resolved in a matter of months. or even weeks. while litigation can take years. u ADR can save monay. Attorney’s fees, court costs. and expert fees wan be reduced or avoided altogether. o ADR provides more participation. Parties have more opportunities with ADR to express their Interests and concerns. instead of focusing exclusively on legal rights. o ADR provides mom control and flexibility. Parties can choose the ADR process that is most likely to bring a satisfactmy resolution to their dispute. o ADR con reduce stress. ADR encourages cooperation and communication. while discouraging the adversarial atmosphere o! litigation. Surveys of parties who have participated in an ADR process have found much greater satisfaction than with parties who have gone atrough litigation. Whatm the main forms ofADR oficred by tho Court? Mediation is an informal. confidentiat. flexible and non-binding process in the medialor helps the parties to understand the interests of everyone invoivod, and their practical and legal choices. The mediator helps me parties to communicate better, exptore legal and practical settlement options. and reach an acceptable solution of the probiem. The mediator does not decide the solution to the dispute; the parties do. Mediation may be appropriate when: o The parties want a non-adversary procedure o The parties have a continuing business or persona! reiationship . Communication problems ate interfering with a resolution o There ls an emotional element invoived o The parties are interested in an injunction. consent decree. or other form of equitable relief Neutral evaluation. sometimes safled “Early Neutral Evaluation” or "ENE”. is an informal process in which the evaluator. an experienced neutral lawyer. hears a compact presentation of both sides of the case. gives a non-blndlng assessmentof the strengths and weaknesses on each side. and predicts the likely outcome. The evaluator can hetp parties to identify issues. prepare stipulations, and draft discovery plans. The parties may use the neutral's evaluation to discuss settlement. Neutral evaluation may be appropriate when: o The parties are far apart in their view of the law or value of the case o The case invoives a technical issue in Mich the eva1uator has expertise o Case planning assistance would be helpful and would save Iegal fess and costs o The parties are interested in an injunction, consent decree. or other form of equitabie relief over. cv~5003 REV 6126113 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION INFORMATION SHEET CIVIL DIVISION Case 5:21-CV-O4499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 30 Of 47 Arbitration is a less formal process than a trial. with no jury. The arbittator hears the evidence and arguments of the parties and then makes a written decision. The partieaun agree to binding or non-binding arbitration. In binding arbitration. the arbitrator's decision is fina! and completaty resolves the case. without the opportunity for appoai. In nonbinding arbitration? the arbitrator’c decision could msoivo tho case. without the opportunity for appeal. unfit: a party timely rejects the arbitrator‘s decision within 30 days and requests a trial. Private arbitrators are allowed to charge for their time. Arbitration may be appropriate when: o The action is for personal injury, property damage. or breach of contract o Only monetary damages are sought Witness tesfimony. undar oath. needs to be evaluated o An advisory opinion Is sought from an experienced litigator (if a non-binding albitralion) Civil Judge ADR aflows parties to have a mediation or settlement conference with an experienced judge ofthe Superior Court Mediation is an informal, confidanlial, flexible and nonbinding process in which the judge heaps the parties to understand the Interests of everyone Invotvad. and their pracflcal and legal choices. A settlement oonferem is an informal process in which the judge meets with the parties or their attorneys. hears the facts ofthe dispute. helps identify issues to be resolved. and nomially suggests a resolution that tho patties may accept or use as a bash for further negotiations. The request for madiafion or satflomont conference may ho made prompfly by stipulation (agreement) uaon the flung of the Civil complaint and the answer. There is no charge for this service. Civil Judge ADR may be appropriate when: o The panies have complex facts to review o The case involves multiple parties and problems o The courthouse surroundings would he helpful to the settlement process Special masters and referees are neutral parties who may be appointed by the com to obtain information or to make specific fact findings that may lead to a resolution of a dispute. Special masters and referees can be particulafly effective in complex cases with a number of patties. like construction disputes. Sofihment conferences are Informal processes in which the neutral (ajudge oran experienced attorney) meets with the parties ortheir attorneys. hears the facts of the dispute. helps identify issues to be resolved. and normaliy suggests a resolution that the parties may accept or use as a basis for futther negotiations. Settlement conferences can be effective when the authority or expertise of the judge or experienced attorney may help the pames reach a resolution. What kind ofdisputes can be resolved by ADR? AIthough some disputes must go ta court, aimost any dispute can be resolved through ADR. This includes disputes involving business matters; civfl rights; collections; corporations; construction; consumer protection; contracts; copyrights; defamation; disabilities; discrimination; employment; environmental problems: fraud; harassment; health care; housing; insurance; inteltectua! property; labor; landlordltenant; media; medical malpractice and other professional negligence; neighborhood problems; partnerships; patents; personal injury: probate; product liability; propedy damage; real estate: securities: sports; trade secret; and wrongfut death. among other matters. Where can you gut assistance with selecting an appropriate form ofADR and a neutral foryour case, Informstlon aboutADR procedures, or answer: to other questions aboutADR? Contact: Santa Clara County Superior Court Santa Clara County DRPA Coordinator ADR Administrator 408-792-2784 405882-2530 cv-saoa REV 5126113 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION INFORMATION SHEET CIVIL DIVISION Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 31of47 EXHIBIT B 2 Cv-0 499-NC ent - i e f 4 HI I Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 32 of 47 Created with a trial version of Syncfusion Essential PDF Cl. CT Corporation Service of Process Transmittal 05/12/2021 CT Log Number 539544099 TO: Beverly Wedin, Manager, Legal Department Transdev North America, Inc. 720 E Butterfield Rd Ste 300 Lombard, IL 60148-5601 RE: Process Served in California FOR: TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC. (Domestic State: DE) l!NCLOll!D ARE COPll!S OF Ll!GAL PROCESS Rl!CEIVl!D BY THI! STATUTORY AGBNT OF THB ABOVE COMPANY AS FOLLOWS: TITLI! OF ACTION: DOCUMENT(S) 88RV8D: COURT/AGl!NCY: NATURE OF ACTION: ON WHOM PROCUS WAS Sl!RVED: DATE AND HOUR OF SERVICE: .llURISDICTIDN SERVED : APPEAAANCI! DR ANSWl!R DUE: ATTORNEY(&) I Sl!NDER(S): ACTION ITl!MS: Rl!GISTBRl!D AGl!NT ADDRBSS: KIMBERLY WICKLANDER, ETC., PLTF. vs. TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC., ETC., ET AL., DFTS. None Specified Case# 21CV381733 Employee Litigation • Wrongful Termination C T Corporation System, Los Angeles, CA By Process Server on 05/12/2021 at 15:14 California None Specified None Specified CT has retained the current log, Retain Date: 05/12/2021, Expected Purge Date: 05/17/2021 Image SOP Email Notification, Beverly Wedin beverly.wedin@transdev.com C T Corporation System 818 West 7th Street Los Angeles, CA 90017 800-448-5350 MajorAccountTeam 1@wolterskluwer.com The information contained in this Transmittal is provided by CT for quick reference onty. It does not constitute a legal opinion, and should not otherwise be relied on, as to the nature of action, the amount of damages, the answer date, or any other information contained in the included documents. The recipient(s) of this form is responsible for reviewing and interpreting the Included documents and taking appropriate action, including consulting with its legal and other advisors as necessary. CT disclaims all liability for the information contained in this form, including for any omissions or inaccuracies that may be contained therein. Page 1 of 1 I ON Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Documentl-l ' (-9. Wolters Kluwer PROCESS SERVER DELIVERY DETAILS Date: Wed, May 12, 2021 Server Nlme: Jimmy Lizama Entity Served TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC. Agent Name “288418 Case Number 21CV381733 Jurisdiction CA lllllllllllll llllllll lllllll lllll Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 34 of 47 EXHIBIT C 2 cv-O 499-N ent - i e 0f HI I WOOQGM¥WN~ NNNNNNNNNHMflHHHHHH-d OOQQMAWNwowooQONUIAWNV-‘O Case 5:21-CV-O4499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 35 0f 47 TOREY JOSEPH FAVAROTE (SBN: 198521) JING TONG (SEN: 285061) GLEASON & FAVAROTE, LLP 4014 Long Beach Blvd., Suite 300 Long Beach, California 90807 Telcphone: (21 3) 452-05 10 Facsimile: (21 3) 452-05 14 tfavarote@gleasonfavarote.com jtong@gleasonfavarote.com Attorneys for Defendant TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE 0F CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA - DOWNTOWN KIMBERLY WICKLANDER, an individual; Plaintiff, VS. TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC, a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive; Defendants. VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV Case No. 21CV381733 DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF KIMBERLY WICKLANDER’S UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT Action Filed: Trial Date: April 7, 2021 None TO PLAINTIFF KIMBERLY WICKLANDER AND HER ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: Defendant Transdcv Alternative Services, Inc. (“Defendant”) hereby answers the unverified Complaint filed by plaintiff Kimberly Wicklandcr (“Plaintiff’) as follows: GENERAL DENIAL Pursuant to the provisions of Section 431.30(d) of the California Code of Civil Procedure, Defendant generally denies each and every allegation and. cause of action contained in Plaintiffs Complaint, and further denies that Plaintiff has been damaged in any manner or amount, or at all, as a result of any act or omission by Defendant. l "‘D"E' FENDANT TRANsnEv ALTERNATIVE SERVICES. mess ANSWER To PLAINTWF KIMBERLY WICKLANDER’S UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT "w“. ., ....... - ...._. ... \DOOQOxM-bszv-A NNNNNNNNMHHo-anH-d-dwt-og-a ®~JOSM¥&NHO‘OWQONM$WNHC Case 5:21-cv-04499~NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 36 of 47 _ Additionally, Defendant asserts the following affirmative defenses and pray forjudgment as set forth below: FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 1. As a separate and afi'n'mative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to every cause of action alleged therein, Defendant alleges that the claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the applicable statute of limitations, including but not limited to Government Code sections 12960 and 12965 and California Code of Civil Procedure section 33S. l . SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintist Complaint and to every cause of action alleged therein, Defendant alleges that Plaintiff‘s claims, arc barred, in whole or in pan, by the doctrine of laches. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 3. As a separate and afi'mnative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to every cause of action alleged therein, Defendant is informed and believes and based upon such information and belief alleges that Plaintiff has or had unclean hands with respect to the matters alleged in her Complaint, and on that ground, is barred fiom recovering any reliefon her Complaint. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 4. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff‘s Complaint and to every cause of action alleged therein, Defendant alleges that the Complaint fails to allege complaints or claims sufficient to sustain the imposition of punitive damages against Defendant pursuant to California Civil Code section 3294. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 5. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiffs Complaint and to every cause of action alleged therein, Defendant is informed and believes, and based upon such information and belief alleges, that Plaintiff has failed to exhaust her administrative remedies, including but not limited to those set forth in California Government Code section 12940, et. seq. /// /// 2 DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVFSERVICES, INC.’S ANSWER T0 PLAINTIFF KIMBERLY WICKLANDER‘S UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT \OODQOUIAUJNu-n NNNNNNNNNHHHHHH-v-n-o- MQONM$WNHO©WQONM&WNF‘O Case 5:21-cv~04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 37 of 47 SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 6. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to every cause of action alleged therein, Defendant alleges that Plaintiff is barred, in whole or in part, for the reason that, by her actions, Plaintiff is estopped from bringing any claim for relief against Defendant. SEVENTH AFFIRMATI D SE 7. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintifi‘s Complaint and to every cause of action alleged therein, Defendant is informed and believes and based upon such information and belief alleges that by her conduct, Plaintiff has waived any right to recover any relief by her Complaint. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 8. As a separaté and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to every cause of action alleged therein, Defendant alleges that Plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 9. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff‘s Complaint and to every cause of action alleged therein, Defendant alleges that said Complaint fails t6 allege complaints sufficient to allow recovery of attomeys’ fees from Defendant. TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 10. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff‘s Complaint and to every cause of action alleged therein, Defendant alleges that if Plaintiff sustained damages by reason of the allegations in the Complaint, which allegations are denied, then Plaintifl‘ may not recover for such damages because by her own acts and omissions, she has failed to properly mitigate those damages. ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 11. As a separate and afi‘lrmative defense to Plaintifl‘s Complaint and to each purported cause of action contained therein, Defendant alleges that Plaintiff’s right to recovery is barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of Aficr-Acquired Evidence. /// 3 *DEF'E‘ NDANT T'itANSDEv ALTERNATIVETERVICES, Incas ANSWER To PLAINTIFF KIMBERLY WICKLANDER’S UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT . Mwww-w.»ww‘w‘»m .M \OWQQthNo-I MMNNNNNNNn-ot-I-Hrd-It‘u-au-tp-a WNGU‘ukWNHCWWKIO‘M-FMNHQ Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 38 of 47 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 12. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintifi’s Complaint and to each purported cause of action contained therein, Defendant alleges, assuming arguendo, that there was a violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act and/or other violation of law, Plaintiff’s claims remain barred, in whole or in part, because even without any said impennissible complaint, the employment actions taken herein still would have been taken due to work performance reasons and/or other legitimate, nonprohibitcd, and/or independent reason(s). Defendant herewith raise the “mixcd-motivc” defense. THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 13. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintifi‘s Complaint, the Complaint, and each cause of action set forth therein, is barred, in whole or in part, because Plaintiff consented to, approved, or participated in the alleged conduct about which Plaintiffnow complains. FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE I4. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint Defendant alleges that to the extent Plaintiff’s claims involve conduct that is governed by a collective bargaining agreement or seek remedies that are governed or regulated by federal law or a collective bargaining agreement, such claims are preempted by federal law and the National Labor Relations Act. FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff‘s Complaint, the claims of Plaintiff arc precmpted/barred by Section 301 of the Labor Relations Management Act, 29 U.S.C. §185. SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 16. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint, Plaintiff’s claims are pre-empted and subject to the various arbitration provisions set forth in her collective bargaining agreement. SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMA’I‘IVE DEFENSE 17. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff‘s Complaint, any potential recovery by Plaintiff is barred or at a minimum limited by the doctrine of avoidable consequences. 4 DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S ANSWWER T0 PLAINTIFF KIMBERLY WICKLANDER’S UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT \OMQGMhWNV-fl NNNHHmn-nmn-nI-It-tt-at-A Case 5:21-CV-O4499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 39 0f 47 EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 18. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action alleged therein, Defendant alleges that at all times relevant hereto, Defendant exercised reasonable care to prevent and correct promptly any purportedly harassing behavior, and to the extent Plaintiff unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventative ‘and/or corrective opportunities provided by Defendant or to avoid harm otherwise, Plaintifi‘s claim is barred. NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFEN§E 19. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action alleged therein, Defendant alleges that at all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff is barred fiom any recovery in this action because there were good and sufficient lawful cause and reasons for any alleged employment actions that affected Plaintiff. TWENTIETH AFFXRMATIVE DEFENSE 20. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint, and each cause of action alleged therein, Defendant alleges that its conduct was a just and proper' exercise of managerial discretion, undertaken for fair and honest reasons, comporting with good faith under the circumstances then existing, and was privileged and justified. TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 21. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintifi’s Complaint and to each purported cause of action contained therein, Defendant alleges that all actions and conduct by Defendant about which Plaintiff complains would have been made 0r taken regardless of any discriminatory or harassing conduct alleged, and that all actions by Defendant about which Plaintiff complains were for just, fair, privileged,justified, non-harassing, non-discriminatory, and legitimate business reasons. TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 22. As a separate and aflirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to each purported cause of action contained therein, Defendant alleges that Plaintist claims for damages are precluded to the extent those alleged damages are speculative. /// 5. DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF KIMBERLY WICKLANDER’S UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT @WQQMhb’Nv-n NNNNNNNNNh‘HwammmH-t OOQO‘UIhUNHOWOOQGM-hWNF-‘O Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 4O 0f 47 TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 23. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff‘s Complaint, Defendant denies that it owed any amounts to Plaintiff; but if it should be detexmined that any amounts are owed, Defendant alleges that at all times herein, reasonable good faith disputes existed as to whether any such amounts were owed. TWENTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 24. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintifi‘s Complaint, PIaifitiff’s Complaint is barred, in whole or in part, by the principles of satisfaction and accord and/or satisfaction and payment. TWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 25. As a separate and affirmative» defense to Plaintiffs Complaint, Plaintiff is not entitled to recover any civil penalties, and/or any recovery-of penalties should be reduced because, under the circumstances of this case, any such recovery would be unjust, arbitrary, oppressive or confiscatory h TWENTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 26. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s seventh cause of action alleging violations of California Labor Code Section 203, Defendant contends that it failed to pay Plaintiff all wages at the time of termination, the allegation of which it denies, such failure to pay was not “willful” within the meaning of Section 203 ofthe California Labor Code. TWENTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 27. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s first cause of action alleging violations of California Labor Code Section 1197.5, Defendant alleges that any wage disparity is justified because the challenged wages are set pursuant to a (l) a seniority system, (2) merit system, or (3) a differential based on a factor other than sex. TWENTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 28. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiffs Complaint and to every cause of action alleged therein, Defendant alleges that if Plaintiff sustained damages by reason of the allegations in the Complaint, which allegations were denied, Plaintiff’s exclusive remedy for the 6 DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, 1NC.’S ANSWER T0 PLAINTIFF KIMBERLY WICKLANDER’S UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT OWQOSM-bWNu-t NNNNNNNNNI-‘mo-ommu-‘h-o-Iv-iu- OOQON'JihbJNfi-‘OWW‘JQM-hwluh‘o Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 41 of 47 damages are governed by the California Workers Compensation Act, Cal. Labor §§3200 et. seq. and 3600 er. seq. TWENTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 29. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to each purported cause of action contained therein, Defendant alleges that it had insufiicient knowledge or information upon which to form a belief as to whether they may have additional, as yet unstated, separate defenses available. Defendant reserves the right to amend this Answer to add, delete, or modify defenses based upon legal theories, which may or will be divulged through clarification of Plaintiffs vague Complaint, through discovery, or through further legal analysis of Plaintifi‘s positions in this litigation. WHEREFORE, Defendant prays as follows: 1. That Plaintiff takes nothing by this action; 2 That the Complaint be dismissed with prejudice; 3 That judgment be entered in favor ofDefendant; 4. For costs of suit and for reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred by Defendant; and 5 For such other and further reliefas the Court deems just and preper. Dated: June 8, 2021 GLEASON & FAVAROTE, LLP TOREY JOSEPH FAVAROTE JING TONG By: , ng Attorneys for Defend SDEV ALTERNATIVE SBR S, INC. 7 DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC ’S ANSWER T0 PLAINTIFF KIMBERLY WICKLANDER’S UNVERlFlED COMPLAINT \quamhwl’du NNNNN NNNHHfi-‘I-IHHHHI-in-I mqamngHOWWQGMAWN-‘C Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 42 of 47 FOR JURY TRIAL Defendant hereby demands a trial by jmy. Dated: June 8, 2021 GLEASON & FAVAROTE, LLP TOREY JOSEPH FAVAROTE JING TONG ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC. 8 ' "DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNAT‘IVE SERVICES, Inc’s ANSWER To PLAINTIFF KIMBEELY WICKLANDER’S UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT \ODOQQU!#wN--n NNN NNNNNflflwww-ip-mfln-I W968&WNN°@WQQM&WNHO Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1~1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 43 of 47 PROOF 0F SERVICE I, Thomas Steinhart, declare: I am and was at the time ofthe service mentioned in this declaration, employed in the County ofLos Angeles, California. I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to the within action. My business address is Gleason & Favarote, LLP, 4014 Long Beach Blvd., Suite 300, Long Beach, CA 90807. On June 8, 2021 , I served a copy(ics) ofthe following document(s): DEFENDANT TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC.’S ANSWER T0 PLAINTIFF KIMBERLY WICKLANDER’S UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT on the parties to this action by placing them in a sealed envelope(s) addressed as follows: Tel: (818) 61 0-8800 Fax: (818) 610-3030 jml@jmllaw.com egruzen@jmllaw.com christina@jmllaw.com Attorney Party(ies) Served Method of Service Joseph M. Lovretovich Attorneys for One Legal, LLC Eric M. Gruzen PlaintiffKIMBERLY Christina R. Manalo WICKLANDER JML LAW 5855 Topanga Canyon Boulevard, Suite 300 Woodland Hills, CA 91 367 K4 [BY DESIGNATED ELECTRONIC FILING SERVICE] [hereby cenify that the above-referenced document(s) were served electronically on the patties listed herein at their most recent known email address or email ofrecord by submitting an electronic version of the document(s) to One Legal, LLC, through the user interface at www.onelegal.com. D [BY OVERNIGHT COURIER] I caused the sealed envelope(s) to be delivered by a commercial courier service for overnight delivery to the offices ofthe addressce(s). D [BY HAND] I directed the sealed envelope(s) to the party(ies) so designated on the service list to be delivered by Ace Attorney Service, Inc. this date. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws ofthe State of California that the above is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed on June 8, 2021, at L g Be , a ifomia. 9 PROOFTYF'SERVICE Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 44 of 47 EXHIBIT D 21-cv-O 499-NC ent - ed 2 I I Case 5. 21---cv”04499NC Document 1 1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 45 of 47 DocuSign Envelope ID: 4F02DCGA-91EMMA-9A71-FA99007501A9 VOOOQQUI$UJNH NNNNNNNNNHHer-Ir-‘HHHr-u WQQM§WNHOQWQQMhWNHO DECLARATION 0F ANNA FUENTES I, Anna Fuentes, declare that: 1. I am employed by Transdev Alternative Services, Inc. (“Defendan ” or “Transdev”) as a Regional Director of Human Res'ources. I have held that position since August 15, 2012 and have worked for Transdev (formerly known as Veolia Transportation Services, Inc.) since November 1, 2010. I have personal knowledge of the following based upon corporate records which are within my custody and control, among others. I am informed and believe that said corporate records are maintained in the regular course of business, entries are made in the records at or near the time of the transactions shown, and the transactions are entered by the individuals responsible for the processing and tracking of said information. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this declaration and if called as a witness, I could and would competently testify to the matters set forth herein. 2. Transdev is now and was at the time this action was commenced a corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business located in Lombard, Illinois. 3. Transdev’s headquarters, and its executive and senior management personnel as well as its primary management operations are located in Illinois. Moreover, the corporate officers of Transdev actually direct, control, and coordinate the corporation’s activities from Transdev’s offices in Illinois. The corporate human resources department, employee benefits department, legal department, procurement department, accounting department, and IT department utilized by Transdev are located in Lombard, Illinois. Simply put, Transdev’s center of “direction, control and coordination” is located in the State of Illinois; thus, for diversity purposes, Transdev must be considered a citizen of Illinois and Delaware. Accordingly, Transdev is not a citizen of the State of California. 4. As the Regional Director of Human Resources, I have access to the employee records of current and former Transdev employees, including payroll 2. DECLARATION 0F ANNA FUENTES IN SUPPORT OF THE NOTICE}? REMOVAL Case 5:21~cv~04499nNC Document 1«1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 46 of 47 DocuSign Envelope ID: 4FOZDCGA-91 E4434A-9A71-FAQQDD7501A9 \OOONIQ'JthUJN-d NNNNNNNNNHW-‘r-Hm-H-w- OOHQM§WNHOWOONGU1AWNHO records. I was able to pull the payroll records for Kimberly Wicklander. Ms. Wicklander was terminated from her employment with Defendant on January 29, 2020. According to Transdev’s payroll records for Ms. Wicklander, her hourly rate of pay was $20.00. I testify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California and of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed on this 8th day of June, 2021, at Walnut, California. newsman by: am FMS 53030497EDM49A... ANNA FUENTES 3 DECLARATION 0F ANNA FUENTES 1N SUPPORT 0F THE NOTICE 0F REMOVAL WOOQQMAWNn-a NNNNNNNNNHmHu-IHHHHHH mflmmfiwNHOOOOQONUI-bUNI-‘O Case 5:21-cv-04499-NC Document 1-1 Filed 06/10/21 Page 47 of 47 PROOF OF SERVICE I, Thomas Steinhart, .declare: v . . _ . I am and was at the tlme of the servmelmenfiloned 1n thls declaratlon, em loyed 1n the Countx ofLos Angeles, Calgfornla. I am pver the age of 18 years an not a arty to the Wlthm actlop. My busmess address ls Gleason & Favarote, LLP, 401 Lon Beach B1vd., Sulte 300, Long Beach, CA.90807. On June 1, 2021 I served a chéglqea) ofthe followmg document s : DECLARATION OF JING o IN SUPPORT 0F REMO AL (fgnnthe partles to thls actlon by placmg them 1n a sealed envelope(s) addressed as o ows: Attorney Party(ies) Served Method of Service Jose h M. Lovretovich Attorne s for First Class Mail Eriq _. Gruzen Plaintif Chrlstma R. Manalo KIMBERLY JML LAW WICKLANDER 5855 Toganga Canyon Boulevard, Suite 3O Woodland Hills CA 91367 Tel: (8188) 610-ésoo Fax: (81 )610-3030 jml@1mllqw.com e ruzen mllaw.com c ristina jmllaw.com E {BY MAIL I placed the sgaled envelope(s) for collection and mailing by ollow1r§ t. e ordmary busmgsstpraptgce of Gleason & Favarote, LLP, Long Beach, allfomia. J am readlly amlhar w1th Gleason & Favarotp, LLP_’s practxqe for collectmg and prgcessu} of cqrrequndence for malhng With the Unlted Stgtes Postal Servwe, sa1 practlce bem§ that, 1n ghq ordmary cqurse ofbqsmess, correspondent)? w1th postage fu ly‘pyepald ls deposued Wllt? th_e Umted States Postal Serv1ce the same day as 1t 13 placed for co ectlon. [:1 53y OVERNIGHT COURIER] I caused the sealed envelope(s) to be ehvered b a commermal courier service for overnight dehvery to the offices oft e addressee(s). D BY HAND] I directed the sealed envelope(s) to thegartyfies) so ‘ 1?: ated on the servme list to be delivered by Ace ttomey Serv1ce, Inc. t ls ate. D [BY CM/ECF SYSTEMl I_caused the above-referench document: S&to be sent by electrqmc trapsmlssmn to the CLerk’s Office usgn phe C F S stem for fillng whlph pnerated a Notlce of Electronlc 11mg to the CF reglstrants 1n Is case. I deplare under penalty oféperjurfiunder the _laws ofthe State of California that the above ls true and correct, an thatt ls declaratlon was exec ed on June 11, 2021, at Long Beach, California. r Hz; Steinhartw) I PROOF 0F SERVICE IS-CAND 44 (Rev. 10/2020) Case 5:21-CV-O4499-%Yvfig%8%kgff£W6/10IZl Page 1 0f 2 The JS-CAND 44 civil cover sheet gnd the information contained hereigx x_leither regace nor supplement the filing and service ofpieadings or other?apers as gequiged by law, except as prgvided by Iocal rules oi court. Thls form, approved in its ongmal form y the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 19 4, is required for the Clerk of Court t0 initiate the civii docket Sheet. {SEE INSIRUCTIONS ONNEXTPAGE0F THIS FORM.) I. (a) PLAINTIFFS KIMBERLY WICKLANDER (b) County of Residence ofFirst Listed Plaintiff Santa Clara (EXCEPTIN U.S, PLAm’TIFF CASES) DEFENDANTS TRANSDEV ALTERNATIVE SERVICES, INC; and DOES 1-50, Inclusive County ofResidence of First Listed Defendant (IN US. PMATIFF CASES ONLY} NOTE; IN LAND CONDEWATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED. Attorneys (IfKnown) Illinois (C) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address. and Telephone Number) Paul Gleason, ling Tong. Gleason & Favamte LLP, 4014 Long Beach. BML, Ste. 300. Long Bach. CA 90807.Joseph M. Lovretovich Esq, Eric M. szen, Christina R. Mmmlo, JML Law, 5855 Topanga Tel: (213) 452-0510, Fax: (213) 452-0514, pg]eason@gleasonfavarote.com, jtong@gleasonfavarote.cmnCanyon Blvd, Suite 300., Woodland Hills, CA 91367, Tc]: (81 8) 610-8800. Fax: (818) 610-3030 II. BASIS 0F JIJRISDICTION (Place an "X" in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSI‘HP 0F PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X" in OneBoijr Plainnfl' (For Diversify Cases Only) and One Boxfor Defendant) 'l US G P1 ‘ ‘ff 3 Fed raIQ ‘ PTF DEF PTF DEF . . ovemment amt: - c uesnon - ~ t _-- . o I . (US Government Not a Parry) szen of Thls State x l 1 Incorpgrated or Pgucxpal Place 4 4 of Busmess In Thls State 2 U S G ID f d t x 4 D_ . Citizen of Another State 2 5' 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 5 x 5 ' ' ovemmen e en an “femur - ~ ~ . f Business In Another State d rCr h P-r '1: III .. °fl" ma e I Rem 1p Of m [es m em ) Citizen or Subject ofa 3 '- ‘3 Foreign Nation 6 6 Foreign Country NATURE OF SUIT (Place an ‘X” in One Box 0n 110 Insurance pERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 625 Drug Related Seizure of 422 Appeal 28 USC § 158 375 False Claims Act 120 Marine 3mAime“ 365 pemm; Injury _ pmdm PfOPeny 21 USC § 831 423 Wimdrawax 28 use. 376 Qui Tam (31 USC 313° Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Liability Mammy 69° 0m“ § 157 § 3729“» 140 Negotiable Instrument 320 Assault. Libe; & gland“ 367 Health Care! 400 S‘ate ReaPP°m°nmem 150 Recovery 0f 330 Federal Employers’ P . apcegucal gags?!” ~7 10 Fair Labor Standards Act 820 Copyrights Am Amm‘m .WWW“ Of Liability - mm m mm ‘1 “y 720 I abm/Mana amen: 830 Patent 243° Banks and Bank“ Veteran's Benefits . '368 Asbestos Personal Injury ‘ ’ A" g ' ‘ 5450 c ,340 Mannc . . . Relations gs ‘ on‘merce 151 Medicare Act ~ _ . A product [Jammy A 8. - Patent-Ab‘bref'xated New -.-460 D ‘ $2 R f f d 345 Mame Product Inability PERSONAL PROPERTY 740 Railway Labor Act Drug Applicauon 39°11‘3th 1‘ Sgggflgmlzigfi‘gdes 350 Motor Vehicle ‘ ‘ P d 751 Famiiy and Medical 34o Trademazk 47° Racketeer lumen?“ 36 . , ‘ 355 Mom, Vehicle product 37o Other mu Leave Act 880 Defend Trade Secrets com!“ orgamzauons Veterans) . .. 3'71 T th' L di ' ' A l 51 Recovery 0f Llabfluy m m en ng 790 Other Labor Litxgatlon AC! 0f 2016 480 C°nsume' cred“ - overpaymem 360 Other Personal Injury 380 Other Personal Pmpmy 79] Employee Retirement " = ' "' 485 Telcph?" consumer fv 's B f 362 Personal Injury -Medical Damage Income Seem“)? Ac‘ Prowcmn Am o eteran s ene It's Malpractice ' 385 propertypamagc prom,“ . ,. 861 490 Cable/Sat TV 160 Stockholders‘ Suns Liability . . RATIO . 862 Black Lung (923.) 850 SecmfieyComodmes, 190 Other Contract _ _ RIGHT msoNERYETmONS 462 Naturalization 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange '95 Comma product Liability I CIVIL.. .. ,, ,V .. . ‘ . . .V .. . Application 864 SSID Tide XVI 890 Other 5mm) , Acfio S . 440 Other Civil Rights MEAS CORpUS . . 1'1) n 196 Francmse . 465 0th“ Immgramn 865 RSI 405 - I ., 441 VO‘ing ‘463 Alien Detainee Actions ,‘ r _‘ (_ jg)? ‘ ‘ I 89] Agricmmml AC“ l. REAL ._ "P. . ., x 442 Employment 510 Motions to Vacate BthAL _.~;lAX_'bUl’l‘§ .893 Envnronmental Mattérs :1210 Land Condemnation 443 Housing; Sentence 870 Taxes (Us. Plamu-fl- or 895 ??edom ofInformanon 51220 Foreclosure Accommodations 53o Genera] Defendant) “I I 5'230 Rem Lease & Ejectmem 445 Amer. w/Disabilifies- 535 Death Penalty 871 IRS-Third Pany 26 USC :3: Arb‘frfmmf 240 Tons m Land Employment OTHER § 7609 :mcmj‘flfij’f‘d‘f f 245 Ton product Liability 446 Amer. w/Disabilitics-Olher S40 M dam & 0th i T_ PP“ 0 h 448 Education . an us er Agency Daemon "290 A11 Other Real Property 550 Civil Rights 950 Constitutionality of Sxate 555. Prison Condition Statutes 560 Civil Detainee- Conditions of Confinement V. ORIGIN (Place an 'X" in One Box Only) l Original X' 2 Removed from 3 Remanded from ' 4 Reinstated or 5 Transferred from 6 Multidistrict 8 Multidistrict Proceeding State Court Appellate Coun Reopened Another District (speciljz) Litigation-Transfer Litigation-Direct File VI. CAUSE OF Cit? theUSCxul Statuteu d 1W1 . h A TI . “91mm“ -=C“‘-i-f=-»- “qu ,.--.‘-.?-*‘Y A?!» Rfiéfilifl‘iW: C'Fnd-ef Discrimmafion f9“? .Iiamssmem, Waiting Time Penaltiga.Unfairfiufiinas Pmctic¢§zI8n¢Wmnsful Tcmfinfifim VII. REQUESTED IN ' CHECK IF THIS Is A CLASS ACTION DEMAND s :3 CHECK YES oniy if demanded in complaint: COMPLAINT; UNDER RULE 23, Fed. R. Cw. P. JURY DEMAND: x Yes --:No VIII. RELATED CASE(S), JUDGE IFANY (See instructions): ' $1 DOCKET NUMBER IX. DIVISIONAL ASSIGNMENT (Civil Local Rule 3-2) (Piace an “X” in One Box Only) SAN FRANCISCO/OAKLAND X SAN JOSE EUREKA-MCKINLEYVLLLE DATE 06/10/2021 SIGNATURE 0F ATTORNEY OFRECORD xsugrong :22; . . \DOOQQM-kDJNr-a NNNNNNNNNHr-Ir-iu-mwr-Hv-g- mQaUt-BWNHOOOO-QONUIAWNHO Case 5:21-cv-O4499-NC Document 1-2 Filed 06/10/21 Page 2 of 2 PROOF 0F SERVICE I, Thomas Steinhart, 'declare: . _ . . . I am and was at the tlme of the serv1ce mentloned m this declaratlon, em loyed in the County ofLos Angeles, California. I am _over the age of 18 years an not a arty to the Wlthm actlop. My busmess address ls Gleason & Favarote, LLP, 401 Lon Beach Blvd., Sulte 300, Long Beach, CA.90807. On June 0, 202 1 , I served a coEyO‘cfslg of the followmg document(s): O _ _ CIVIL O “R SHEET