Party Notice: MICELI vs DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.,

On November 20, 2023 a Party Notice was filed involving a dispute between Miceli, Corey, Perry, Cheri, and Dollar Tree Stores, Inc.,, for 15: Unlimited Other Employment in the District Court of Sonoma County.

Preview
ELENA R. BACA (SB# 160564)
elenabaca@paulhastings.com
JENNIFER MILAZZO (SB# 318356)
jennifermilazzo@paulhastings.com
PAUL HASTINGS LLP
515 South Flower Street, 25th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 683-6000
Facsimile: (213) 627-0705

RYAN D. DERRY (SB# 244337)
ryanderry@paulhastings.com
PAUL HASTINGS LLP
101 California Street, 48th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 856-7000
Facsimile: (415) 856-7100

10 Attorneys for Defendant
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.
11

12 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

13 FOR THE COUNTY OF SONOMA

15 COREY MICELI and CHERI PERRY, CASE NO. 23CV01630
individually, and on behalf of others similarly
16 situated, NOTICE TO SUPERIOR COURT OF
REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION TO
17 Plaintiffs, FEDERAL COURT BY DEFENDANT
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.
18 vs.
Courtroom: 16
19 DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC., a Virginia Judge: Hon. Patrick Broderick
corporation; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive,
20 Complaint Filed: November 20, 2023
Defendants. Trial date: None set
21

NOTICE TO SUPERIOR COURT OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
TO THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF 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 January 4, 2024. A

conformed copy of the Notice of Removal is attached to this Notice as Exhibit 1, and is served

and filed herewith. Conformed copies of the Declaration of Ryan Derry in Support of Removal,

Declaration of Jeffrey Whitemore in Support of Removal, Civil Case Coversheet, Corporate

Disclosure Statement, and Certification of Conflicts and Interested Entities or Persons, filed with

the Notice of Removal are attached hereto as Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 respectively.

11 DATED: January 4, 2024 PAUL HASTINGS LLP
ELENA R. BACA
12 RYAN D. DERRY
JENNIFER L. MILAZZO
13 -
~

14 By: | >7 ah
RYAND-DERRY
~. ~

15
Attorneys for Defendant
16 DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.

-2-
NOTICE TO SUPERIOR COURT OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
PROOF OF SERVICE

Iam employed in the City of San Francisco and County of San Francisco, State of
California. I am over the age of 18, and not a party to the within action. My business address is
101 California Street, Forty-Eighth Floor, San Francisco, California 94111.

On January 4, 2024, I served the foregoing document(s) described as:

NOTICE TO SUPERIOR COURT OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION TO FEDERAL
COURT BY DEFENDANT DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.

on the interested parties as follows:

Jonathan M. Genish
Karen I. Gold
Marissa A. Mayhood
BLACKSTONE LAW, APC
8383 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 745
10 Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Ema: jgenish@blackstonepe.com
11 Ema: kgold@blackstonepe.com
Email mmayhood@blackstonepce.com
12

13 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL:
By personally emailing the aforementioned document(s) in PDF format to the
14
respective email address(es) listed above on January 4, 2023. I did not receive an
electronic message indicating any errors in transmission.
15

16 VIA U.S. MAIL:
I deposited such sealed envelope(s) with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the
17 United States mail at San Francisco, California.
18
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above
19 is true and correct.
20 Executed on January 4, 2024, at San Francisco, California.
21

22
/s/ Chris Altamirano
23 Chris Altamirano

PROOF OF SERVICE
EXHIBIT 1
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 1 of 63

ELENA R. BACA (SB# 160564)
elenabaca@paulhastings.com
JENNIFER MILAZZO (SB# 318356)
jennifermilazzo@paulhastings.com
PAUL HASTINGS LLP
515 South Flower Street, 25th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 683-6000
Facsimile: (213) 627-0705

RYAN D. DERRY (SB# 244337)
ryanderry@paulhastings.com
PAUL HASTINGS LLP
101 California Street, 48th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 856-7000
Facsimile: (415) 856-7100

10 Attorneys for Defendant
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.
11

12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15 COREY MICELI and CHERI PERRY, CASE NO. 3:24-cv-83
individually, and on behalf
of others similarly
16 situated, DEFENDANT DOLLAR TREE STORES,
INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF
17 Plaintiffs, CIVIL ACTION

18 vs. Sonoma County Superior Court
Case No. 23CV01630
19 DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC., a Virginia
corporation; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Complaint Filed: November 20, 2023
20
Defendants.
21

DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 2 of 63

TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES, AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant Dollar Tree Stores, Inc. (“Dollar Tree”) hereby

removes the above-captioned action from the Superior Court for the State of California, in and for the

County of Sonoma (“Superior Court”), to the United States District Court for the Northern District of

California (“District Court”), based on diversity of citizenship jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. section 1332

(as amended by the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”), Pub. L. 109-2, § 4(a), 119 Stat. 9). In

support of removal, Dollar Tree alleges as follows:

1 On November 20, 2023, Plaintiffs Corey Miceli and Cheri Perry filed a putative class

action in Sonoma County Superior Court entitled: “COREY MICELI and CHERI PERRY, individually,

10 and on behalfof others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC., a Virginia

11 corporation; and DOES I through 25, inclusive, Defendants,” Sonoma County Superior Court Case

12 No. 23CV01630 (“Complaint”). The allegations in the Complaint are incorporated into this Notice by

13 reference without admitting the truth of any of them.

14 2 In the Complaint, Plaintiffs purport to bring class claims on behalf
of themselves and the

15 following putative classes: “All current and former salaried employees whom Defendants classified as

16 exempt and who worked for Defendants in the State of California at one or more of Defendants’ retail

17 locations at any time during the period from four years prior to the date of the filing of this Complaint

18 until final judgment (‘Class Period’), excluding any members of Defendants’ executive leadership teams

19 and/or their Board of Directors.” (The “Plaintiffs’ Putative Class”). Compl. §j 29. Plaintiffs also plead

20 a “Former Employee Sub-class” defined as: “All Class members whose employment with Defendants

21 ended either permanently or temporarily during the Class Period.” Compl. 430. The Complaint asserts

22 nine putative class action causes of action for: (1) failure to pay minimum wages; (2) failure to pay

23 overtime wages; (3) meal break violations; (4) rest break violations; (5) wages not timely paid during

24 employment; (6) failure to provide accurate wage statements; (7) untimely final wages; (8) failure to

25 reimburse necessary business expenses; and (9) unfair competition in violation of California Business

26 and Professions Code sections 17200, et seg. See Compl.

27 3 On December 6, 2023, Plaintiffs personally served Dollar Tree with the Summons and

28 the Complaint in this Action. A true and correct copy of the Summons and Complaint served on Dollar

-2-
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 3 of 63

Tree on December 6, 2023, is attached to this Notice as Exhibit A.

4 With the Summons and the Complaint, Plaintiffs also personally served Dollar Tree with

a Civil Case Cover Sheet, Notice of Assignment to One Judge for All Purposes, Notice of Case

Management Conference, and Order to Show Cause in this Action. True and correct copies of the Civil

Case Cover Sheet, Notice of Assignment to One Judge for All Purposes, Notice of Case Management

Conference, and Order to Show Cause served on Dollar Tree on December 6, 2023, are attached to this

Notice as Exhibits B and C, respectively.

5 Exhibits A through C contain all process, pleadings, and orders served on Dollar Tree, as

ofthe date of this removal.

10 6. On December 7, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a “Proof of Service of Summons,” reflecting

11 service of the Complaint on December 6, 2023. A true and correct copy of the “Proof
of Service of

12 Summons” is attached to this Notice as Exhibit D.
7
13 On January 2, 2024, Dollar Tree filed its Answer to Plaintiffs’ Putative Class Action

14 Complaint. A true and correct copy of Dollar Tree’s Answer is attached to this Notice as Exhibit E.

15 8 Exhibits A through E also reflect all documents that Dollar Tree understands have been

16 filed in this matter. A true and correct copy of the “Events and Hearings” tab on the docket in this

17 matter from the Sonoma County Superior Court, as of the date of this removal, is attached to this notice

18 as Exhibit F.

19 9 No other defendant is named in this Action and Dollar Tree is informed and believes that

20 no other defendant has been served with process in this Action.

21 10. This notice of removal is effected properly and timely pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section

22 1446(b).
23 11. Notice of this removal will promptly be given to both Plaintiffs and the Superior Court

24 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1446(d).

25 12. Venue of this Action exists in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1441(a) because

26 the Superior Court is located within this District.

-3-
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 4 of 63

REMOVAL IS PROPER UNDER CAFA
13. The Action is properly removed to this Court under the amended rules for diversity of

citizenship jurisdiction under CAFA. CAFA amended 28 U.S.C. section 1332 to provide that a putative

class action is removable to federal court if (a) any member of a class of plaintiffs is a citizen of a state

different from any defendant; (b) the proposed class members number is at least 100; and (c) the amount

in controversy exceeds $5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d). Each of these

requirements is met in this Action.

DOLLAR TREE IS NOT A GOVERNMENT ENTITY

14. Under 28 U.S.C. section 1332(d)(5)(A), CAFA does not apply to class actions where the

10 “primary defendants are States, State officials, or other governmental entities against whom the district

11 court may be foreclosed from ordering relief.”

12 15. Dollar Tree is not a state, state official, or other governmental entity. See Declaration of

13 Jeffrey Whitemore, filed concurrently herewith (“Whitemore Decl.”), § 3.

14 THE CITIZENSHIP OF THE PARTIES IS DIVERSE

15 16. Dollar Tree is informed and believes that Plaintiffs are now, and were at the time the

16 Action commenced, citizens of the State of California within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. section 1332(a).

17 See Compl. { 10 (“At all times herein mentioned, Plaintiff COREY MICELI was a resident of Los

18 Angeles County in the State of California.”) and § 11 (“At all times herein mentioned, Plaintiff CHERI

19 PERRY was a resident of Sonoma County in the State of California.”).

20 17. A corporation “shall be deemed to be a citizen of every State .. . by which it has been

21 incorporated and of the State . . . where it has its principal place of business.” 28 U.S.C. section

22 1332(c)(1). A corporation’s principal place of business is “the place where a corporation’s officers

23 direct, control, and coordinate the corporation’s activities,” which should “normally be the place where

24 the corporation maintains its headquarters.” Hertz v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 92-93 (2010).

25 18. Dollar Tree is incorporated in Virginia. Whitemore Decl. § 3. Dollar Tree’s

26 headquarters are also located in Virginia, where its executive and senior management personnel, and

27 primary management operations are based. Jd. This is the case for all points in time relevant to this

28 Action. Jd.

-4-
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 5 of 63

19. Dollar Tree is the only named defendant named in this Action. The presence of Doe

defendants has no bearing on diversity with respect to removal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b)(1) (“In

determining whether a civil action is removable on the basis of the jurisdiction under section 1332(a) of

this title, the citizenship of defendants sued under fictitious names shall be disregarded.”).

20. Accordingly, no named defendant is a citizen of California, in which state this Action

was filed, and there is complete diversity of citizenship between the parties.

THE PROPOSED CLASS MEMBERS NUMBER IS AT LEAST 100
21. As discussed in Paragraph 2, Plaintiffs plead their claims on behalf
of current and former

California salaried store employees classified as exempt, Plaintiffs’ Putative Class. See Compl. 4] 29-

10 30.

11 22. Throughout the relevant time period, Dollar Tree has classified California store managers

12 as exempt. See Whitemore Decl., 42. Accordingly, Dollar Tree understands Plaintiffs’ putative class

13 action to be pleaded on behalf
of California store managers.

14 23. Using its employment data, Dollar Tree determined that, between November 20, 2020

15 and December 1, 2023, there have been 331 different terminated California Store Managers of Dollar

16 Tree. Whitemore Decl., 9. This number only includes the Former Employee Sub-class pleaded by

17 Plaintiffs, a subset of Plaintiffs’ Putative Class. Accordingly, the requirement that the proposed class

18 members number be at least 100 is clearly satisfied.

19 THE AMOUNT IN CONTROVERSY EXCEEDS $5,000,000
20 24. Under CAFA, the claims of the individual members in a class action are aggregated to

21 determine if the amount in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $5,000,000. See 28 U.S.C.

22 § 1332(d)(6). In this case, the Complaint is silent as to the amount in controversy. A defendant seeking

23 removal of a putative class action need only demonstrate, “by a preponderance of evidence, that the

24 aggregate amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional minimum.” Rodriguez v. AT & T Mobility

25 Services LLC, 728 F.3d 975, 981 (9th Cir. 2013).

26 25. As reflected below, the amount in controversy exceeds the sum of $5,000,000, exclusive

27 of interest and costs.

-5-
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 6 of 63

WAGE STATEMENT PENALTIES
26. California Labor Code section 226(a) requires an employer to furnish an employee with

an accurate, itemized wage statement at the time of the payment of wages, and the wage statement must

list accurately gross wages earned, total hours worked, net wages earned, and applicable hourly rates in

effect (among other things). Cal. Lab. Code § 226(a). California Labor Code section 226(e), in turn,

creates statutory penalties for a knowing and intentional failure to issue a proper wage statement if the

failure injures the employee. /d. at (e). Those statutory penalties are $50 per employee for the initial

pay period in which a wage-statement violation occurs and $100 per employee for each violation in a

subsequent pay period. Jd. The penalties are capped at $4,000 per employee. Id.

10 27. Plaintiffs purport to bring a claim for statutory penalties pursuant to California Labor

11 Code section 226 on behalf
of themselves and Plaintiffs’ Putative Class. See Compl., fff 29, 33-37.

12 28. Plaintiffs allege the Dollar Tree “intentionally and willfully failed to provide Plaintiffs

13 and other class members with complete and accurate wage statements.” Compl. § 84. Due to Plaintiffs’

14 allegations that Plaintiffs’ Putative Class was misclassified as exempt, Plaintiffs alleged that Dollar

15 Tree’s wage statement deficiencies include, among other things, a “failure to state all hours worked” and

16 “failure to include correct rates of pay.” Jd. Given the nature of Plaintiffs’ allegations, Plaintiffs’ have

17 placed at issue all wage statements issued to Plaintiffs’ Putative Class during the one-year statutory

18 period. See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 340(a).

19 29. Dollar Tree calculated wage statement statutory penalties placed at issue by the

20 Complaint as follows:

21 a) Using its payroll data, Dollar Tree determined that there were approximately 23,330

22 wage statements issued to exempt Dollar Tree store managers in California from

23 November 20, 2022 through December 21, 2023. Whitemore Decl., § 4. Dollar Tree

24 determined that approximately 681 wage statements were issued to Dollar Tree store

25 managers on the first pay date after November 20, 2022. Whitemore Decl., { 5.

26 Furthermore, as discussed above, Dollar Tree also determined that 43 exempt associates

27 were hired in California who received at least one wage statement after November 20,

28 2022. Whitemore Decl., { 6.

-6-
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 7 of 63

b) Dollar Tree then applied the $50 and $100 penalty scheme from California Labor Code

section 226(e).

To determine the total number and amount in controversy calculation for “initial

pay period” wage statements at issue, given the nature of Plaintiffs’ claims in the

Complaint, Dollar Tree added the approximate number of wage statement issued

to non-exempt Dollar Tree associates in California on November 20, 2022 (681)

to the number of exempt associates hired in California who received a wage

statement after November 20, 2022 (43). This equals 724. Dollar Tree then

multiplied that number by $50, which amounts to $36,200.

10 i To determine the total number and amount in controversy calculation for

11 “subsequent pay period” wage statements at issue, given the nature of Plaintiffs’

12 claims in the Complaint, Dollar Tree took the approximate number of wage

13 statements issued to non-exempt Dollar Tree associates in California from

14 November 20, 2022 and December 21, 2023 (23,330) and subtracted the total

15 number of first wage statements calculated in paragraph (i) above (724). This

16 leaves 22,606 wage statements. Dollar Tree multiplied that number by $100,

17 which amounts to $2,260,600.

18 iii. To determine the amount in controversy calculation for wage statements at issue,

19 given the nature of Plaintiffs’ claims in the Complaint, Dollar Tree added the

20 “initial pay period” wage statement violations amount and the “subsequent pay

21 period” wage statement violations amount ($36,200 + $2,260,600). That total

22 amount is $2,296,800.

23 IV. The $4,000 cap per associate does not apply, given that only 13 months have

24 passed since the start of the limitations period. The maximum potential wage

25 statement penalty for any single associate, employed and receiving a wage

26 statement biweekly between November 2022 and December 2023, would be

27 approximately $2,700.

-7-
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 8 of 63

30. In setting forth this calculation, Dollar Tree does not admit that Plaintiffs or any other

person were not provided accurate, itemized wage statements or that Dollar Tree is liable to Plaintiffs or

any other person in any amount or for any relief. On the contrary, Dollar Tree denies that it is liable to

Plaintiffs or any other person in any amount and for any relief.

WAITING TIME PENALTIES
31. Under their Seventh Cause of Action, Plaintiffs allege that Dollar Tree willfully failed to

pay all wages due to discharged and quitting employees, in violation of California Labor Code

section 203. Compl., {88 — 93; Prayer at p. 22:2-12.

32. In a case of willful failure to pay final wages upon termination, California Labor Code

10 section 203 imposes a waiting-time penalty equal to the employee’s daily wage rate for a maximum of

11 30 days. Cal. Lab. Code § 203(a). These penalties are calculated as an employee’s final daily rate of

12 pay (i.e., the employee’s final wage rate times the employee’s average shift length) times the number of

13 days of waiting-time penalties (up to 30 days). See id.; Mamika v. Barca, 68 Cal. App. 4th 487, 491-93

14 (1998).
15 33. Plaintiffs purport to bring their claim pursuant to California Labor Code section 203 on

16 behalf
of associates no longer employed, i.e., Plaintiffs’ “Former Employee Sub-class.” See Compl. §§]

17 30, 38-42. Derivative of Plaintiffs’ other claims, Plaintiffs allege that Dollar Tree “willfully failed to

18 pay Plaintiffs and the other class members all wages owed to them” under California Labor Code

19 sections 201 and 202, thereby entitling them to waiting time penalties under California Labor Code

20 section 203. Compl., {ff 92-93.

21 34. Under California Code of Civil Procedure section 338 and Pineda v. Bank of America,

22 N.A., 50 Cal. 4th 1389, 1395 (2010), the statute of limitations for a claim under Section 203 is three

23 years.

24 35. Applying a potential three-year statute of limitations, the amount in controversy as to

25 Plaintiffs’ Section 203 claim alone is more than $2,831,328.

26 36. Dollar Tree calculated these waiting-time penalties placed at issue by the Complaint as

27 follows:

-8-
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 9 of 63

a) Using its employment data, Dollar Tree has determined that it employed 331 exempt

California store managers whose employment was terminated between November 20,

2020 and December 11, 2023. Whitemore Decl., { 9. Specifically: (i) 3 exempt

California store managers were terminated between November 20, 2020 and December

31, 2020; (ii) 101 exempt California store managers were terminated in 2021; (iii) 112

exempt California store managers were terminated in 2022; and (iv) 115 exempt

California store managers were terminated between January 1, 2023 and December 1,

2023.

b) Store Managers at Dollar Tree in California are paid a salary equivalent of at least twice

10 the minimum wage. Jd. 4. In 2020, the minimum salary for each store manager was

11 equivalent to an hourly rate at full-time employment of $26.00 per hour. See Derry

12 Decl., § 3. In 2021, the minimum salary for each store manager was equivalent to an

13 hourly rate at full-time employment of $28.00 per hour. /d. In 2022, the minimum salary

14 for each store manager was equivalent to an hourly rate at full-time employment of

15 $30.00 per hour. Jd. As of 2023, the minimum salary for each store manager was

16 equivalent to an hourly rate at full-time employment of $31.00 per hour. Jd.

17 c) Throughout the relevant time period, Store Managers in California have been expected to

18 schedule themselves to work in California stores 48 hours per week, 5 days per week,

19 which equates to 9.6 hours per day. See Whitemore Decl. { 7.

20 Accordingly, Dollar Tree assumed that each of the 331 terminated store managers

21 could be entitled to up to 30 days’ worth of waiting-time penalties based on

22 Plaintiff's allegations discussed above.

23 i Thus, for a conservative calculation,' applying the minimum salary that applied as

24 of the salary that applied as of the date of termination for each terminated store

25 manager, the amount in controversy is equal to $2,831,328 [2020: $22,464 (3

26 store managers * 30 days penalties * $26 per hour * 9.6 hours); 2021: $814,464

27 (101 store managers * 30 days penalties * $28 per hour * 9.6 hours); 2022:

28 ' Plaintiffs plead they “often work[ed] at least ten (10) hours per day. . .” Compl. { 2.

-9-
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 10 of 63

$967,680 (112 store managers * 30 days penalties * $30 per hour * 9.6 hours);

2023: $1,026,720 (115 store managers * 30 days penalties * $31 per hour * 9.6

hours)].

37. In setting forth this calculation, Dollar Tree does not admit that Plaintiffs or any other

person are owed any additional wages, that they were not paid all of their final wages upon termination,

or that they were not provided accurate, itemized wage statements; or that Dollar Tree is liable to

Plaintiffs or any other person in any amount or for any relief. On the contrary, Dollar Tree denies that it

is liable to Plaintiffs or any other person in any amount and for any relief.

PENALTIES FOR WAGES NOT TIMELY PAID DURING EMPLOYMENT
10 38. Under their Fifth Cause of Action, Plaintiffs also assert a claim for statutory penalties

11 under Labor Code section 510 for intentionally and willfully failing to timely pay Plaintiffs and

12 Plaintiffs’ Putative Class Members for all wages due to them, within the period required under

13 California Labor Code Section 204. See Compl. {fj 76-81.

14 39. The underlying wages that Plaintiffs’ allege Dollar Tree failed to pay include, overtime,

15 minimum wages, meal break violations, and rest break violations. Jd. at § 80. Plaintiffs allege that

16 Plaintiffs’ Putative Class Members “routinely worked in excess of forty (40) hours per week” and

17 “regularly worked in excess of eight (8) hours in a day, in excess of twelve (12) hours in a day, and/or in

18 excess of forty (40) hours in a week” and were not paid overtime for these additional hours. Jd. at {J 42,

19 52. As to meal break violations, Plaintiffs allege “Defendants intentionally and willfully required

20 Plaintiffs and the other class members” to work during meal periods, take short meal periods, interrupted

21 meal periods, and/or failed to relieve Plaintiffs of all duties during meal periods. Jd. at § 62. As to rest

22 break violations, Plaintiffs allege, in part, that “Defendants routinely required Plaintiffs and the other

23 class members to work three and one-half(3 2) or more hours without authorizing or permitting a

24 compliant ten (10) minute rest period per each four (4) hour period, or major fraction thereof, worked.”

25 Id. at J 69.
26 40. Labor Code section 210 provides for a statutory penalty of $100 for any initial violation

27 for each failure to pay each employee and $200 for each subsequent violation of each failure to pay each

28 employee, plus 25 percent of the amount unlawfully withheld. Cal. Lab. Code § 210(a).

-10-
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 11 of 63

Al. Given Plaintiffs’ allegations that wage amounts were not “routinely” paid, assuming that

just one quarter of pay periods, of the 23,300 pay periods between November 20, 2022 and December

21, 2023 (5,825 pay periods), Dollar Tree failed to pay all wages timely (whether that be on account of

overtime, minimum wage, meal break violation, or rest break violation), that results in an amount in

controversy total of $582,500, applying the initial violation penalty of $100 for each such alleged

failure.

42. In setting forth this calculation, Dollar Tree does not admit that Plaintiffor any other

person were not paid all wages and monies due, are owed any additional wages, that they were not

timely paid wages, or that Dollar Tree is liable to Plaintiffor any other person in any amount or for any

10 relief. On the contrary, Dollar Tree denies that it is liable to Plaintiffs or any other person in any amount

11 and for any relief.

12 AMOUNT PLACED IN CONTROVERSY BY PLAINTIFFS’ ATTORNEYS’ FEES DEMAND
13 43. “TW here an underlying statute authorizes an award of attorneys’ fees, either with

14 mandatory or discretionary language, such fees may be included in the amount in controversy.” Galt G/S

15 v. JSS Scandinavia, 142 F.3d 1150, 1156 (9th Cir. 1998) (recognizing that attorneys’ fees provided by

16 statute are properly included in evaluating the amount in controversy). The Ninth Circuit holds that

17 attorneys’ fees are properly included in the amount in controversy. Gibson v. Chrysler Corp., 261 F.3d

18 927, 942-943 (9th Cir. 2001).

19 44. Reasonable attorneys’ fees are recoverable to a plaintiff alleging causes of action related

20 to and including: (i) the nonpayment of wages, (ii) failure to furnish accurate wage statements, and (ili)

21 unpaid overtime. See Cal. Lab. Code sections 218.5(a), 226(e)(1) and 1194(a). Plaintiffs plead a claim

22 for attorneys’ fees under their first, second, third, eighth, and nine causes of action. See Compl. ¥§ 9, 15,

23 22, 47, and 52. Thus, if Plaintiffs prevail in this action, attorneys’ fees could be awarded, and therefore,

24 the District Court should include attorneys’ fees in its consideration of the amount in controversy.

25 45. For purposes of removal and demonstrating a value of attorneys’ fees in this matter,

26 Dollar Tree estimates attorneys’ fees of $675,000. Dollar Tree calculated these attorneys’ fees as

27 follows:

-ll-
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 12 of 63

a) On September 6, 2022, Plaintiffs’ lead counsel, Karen Gold, Esq., filed a declaration in

support of Request for Attorneys’ Fees, Expert Fees, and Costs Incurred As A Result of

Home Depot’s Intentional Concealment of Robert Crandall’s Pilot Study in which she

declared under penalty of perjury that her bill rate is $750.00. See Declaration of Karen I.

Gold, Utne v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., U.S.D.C. Case No. 3:16-cv-01854-RS. Ms. Gold

was not the lead counsel in this matter, unlike here, which may indicate that her bill rate

as lead counsel would be even higher. Declaration of Ryan Derry, filed concurrently

herewith (“Derry Decl.”), § 1. Accordingly, while Dollar Tree disputes the

reasonableness of these rates, Dollar Tree anticipates Plaintiffs’ counsel would seek

10 attorneys’ fees at least at this hourly rate.

11 b) Another attorney from Ms. Gold’s prior firm submitted the Declaration of Cody R.

12 Kennedy in Support of Motion for Attorneys Fees, Litigation Expenses, and Class

13 Representative Service Awards in Utne v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., U.S.D.C. Case No.

14 3:16-cv-01854-RS. This case was also a wage and hour class action in California, and

15 Mr. Kennedy alleged Ms. Gold billed over 900 hours and that her bill rate was $875 per

16 hour. See Derry Decl., 2. This case never reached trial and the court approved a

17 settlement.

18 c) Thus, even under the most conservative estimations, assuming a similar number of hours

19 billed all the way through trial, Ms. Gold alone would request attorneys’ fees of at least

20 $675,000 ($750 per hour * 900 hours).

21 FINAL TOTAL
22 46. As set forth above and based on conservative calculations using just select causes of

23 action from Plaintiffs’ Complaint for wage statement penalties, waiting time penalties, and failure to

24 timely pay wages total $2,296,800, $2,831,328, and $582,500, respectively. This equals $5,710,628.

25 Adding in a conservative estimate of attorneys’ fees of $675,000, the total amount is $6,385,628.

26 47. By adding only three of Plaintiffs’ prayers for statutory penalties and Plaintiffs’ prayer

27 for attorneys’ fees as set forth above, the amount in controversy clearly exceeds the jurisdictional

28 threshold under CAFA.

-12-
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 13 of 63

48. Based on the foregoing, all requirements under 28 U.S.C. section 1332(d) are satisfied

and the Action may be removed to this Court on grounds of diversity of citizenship jurisdiction under

CAFA.

DATED: January 4, 2024 ELENA R. BACA
RYAN D. DERRY
JENNIFER MILAZZO
PAUL HASTINGS LLP
_

By: L —
Se
“

. RYAN D-DERRY
10 Attorneys for Defendant
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.
11

-13-
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 14 of 63

EXHIBITA
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 15 of 63

%
CSC
null/ ALL
Transmittal Number: 28123287
Notice of Service of Process Date Processed: 12/06/2023

Primary Contact: Essence Oliphant
Dollar Tree Stores Inc
500 Volvo Pkwy
Chesapeake, VA 23320-1604

Electronic copy provided to: Heather Hunter
JJ J acobson-Allen

Entity: Dollar Tree Stores, Inc.
Entity ID Number 3697563
Entity Served: Dollar Tree Stores, Inc.
Title of Action: Corey Micelli vs. Dollar Tree Stores, Inc.
Matter Name/ID: Corey Micelli vs. Dollar Tree Stores, Inc. (14945460)
Document(s) Type: Summons/Complaint
Nature of Action: Class Action
Court/Agency: Sonoma County Superior Court, CA
Case/Reference No: 23CV01630
Jurisdiction Served: California
Date Served on CSC: 12/06/2023
Answer or Appearance Due: 30 Days
Originally Served On: csc
How Served: Personal Service
Sender Information: Blackstone Law, APC
310-622-4278

Information contained on this transmittal form is for record keeping, notification and forwarding the attached document(s). It does not
constitute a legal opinion. The recipient is responsible for interpreting the documents and taking appropriate action.

To avoid potential delay, please do not send your response to CSC
251 Little Falls Drive, Wilmington, Delaware 19808-1674 (888) 690-2882 | sop@cscglobal.com
Case 3:24-cv-00083 Document 1 Filed 01/04/24 Page 16 of 63

SUM-100
SUMMONS FOR COURT USE ONLY
(SOLO PARA USO DE LA CORTE)
(CITACION JUDICIAL)
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
Superior Court of California
NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: County of Sonoma
(AVISO AL DEMANDADO). 11/20/2023 6:12 PM
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC., a Virginia corporation; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive By: Taylor Curtis, Deputy Clerk
‘
YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF:
(LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE)
COREY MICELI and CHERI PERRY, individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated

INOTICE! You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the information
below.
You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this summons and legal papers are served on you to file a written response at this court and have a copy
served on the plaintif. A letter or phone call will not protect you. Your written response must be in proper legal form if you want the court to hear your
case, There may be a court form that you can use for your response. You can find these court forms and more information at the California Courts
Online Self-Help Center (www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfheip), your county law library, or the courthouse nearest you. If you cannot pay the filing fee, ask the
court clerk for a fee waiver form. If you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case by default, and your wages, money, and property may
be taken without further warning from the court.
There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. if you do not know an attomey, you may want to call an attorney
referral service. ff you cannot afford an attorney, you may be eligible for free legal services from 2 nonprofit legal services program. You can locate
these nonprofit groups at the California Legal Services Web site (www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), the California Courts Online Self-Help Center
\(www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), ot by contacting your local court or county bar association. NOTE: The court has a statutory lien for waived fees and
costs on any settlement or arbitration award of $10,000 or more in a civil case. The court's lien must be paid before the court will dismiss the case.
jAVISO! Lo han demandado. Si no responde dentro de 30 dias, la corte puede decidir en su contra sin escuchar su versi6n. Lea /a informacién a
|continuacién.
Tiene 30 DIAS DE CALENDARIO después de que le entreguen esta citaci6n y papeles legales para presentar una respuesta por escrito en esta
corte y hacer que se entregue una copia al demandante. Una carta 0 una /lamada telefonica no lo protegen. Su respuesta por escrito tiene que estar
len formato legal correcto si desea que procesen su caso en la corte. Es posible que haya un formulario que usted pueda usar para su respuesta.
|Puede encontrar estos formularios de /a corte y mas informacion en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California (www.sucorte.ca.gov), en la
biblioteca de leyes de su condado o en Ia corte que le quede més cerca. Sino puede pagar la cuota de presentaci6n, pida al secretario de la corte que
/e dé un formulario de exencién de pago de cuotas. Si no presenta su respuesta a tiempo, puede perder el caso por incumplimiento y la corte le podré
quitar su sueldo, dinero y bienes sin mas advertencia,
Hay otros requisitos legales. Es recomendable que llame a un abogado inmediatamente. Si no conoce a un abogado, puede llamar a un servicio de
remision a abogados. Si no puede pagar a un abogado, es posible que cumpla con los requisitos para obtener servicios legales gratuitos de un
lprograma de servicios legales sin fines de lucro. Puede encontrar estos grupos sin fines de lucro en el sitio web de California Legal Services,
(www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California, (www.sucorte.ca.gov) o poniéndose en contacto con Ia corte o el
colegio de abogados locales. AVISO: Por ley, la corte tiene derecho a reclamar las cuotas y los costos exentos por imponer un gravamen sobre
[cualquier recuperacién de $10,000 6 mas de valor recibida mediante un acuerdo o una concesién de arbitraje en un caso de derecho civil. Tiene que
|pagar el gravamen de la corte antes de que /a corte pueda desechar el caso.

The name and address of the court is: case
(NimeroNuMBER:
del Caso): 23CVO1E30
(El nombre y direccién de la corte es): Civil and Family Law Courthouse
3055 Cleveland Ave., Santa Rosa, CA 95403

The name, address, and telephone number of plaintiff's attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney, is:
(El nombre, la direccién y el ntimero de teléfono del abogado del demandante, o del demandante que no tiene sbogedo, es):

a
Jonathan M. Genish, Blackstone Law, APC, 8383 Wilshire Blvd,, Suite 745, Beverly Hills, (Sfp)
C 622 t
pate: 11/20/2023 6:12 PM
(Fecha)

Case Info

Judge

Broderick, Patrick Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

January 05, 2024

Case Filing Date

November 20, 2023

County

Parties

Baca, Elena Renee Attorney for the Defendant
DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC., Defendant
Genish, Jonathan Meir Attorney for the Plaintiff
MICELI, COREY Plaintiff
Perry, Cheri Plaintiff
Jennifer Milazzo Attorneys for Defendants
Ryan Derry Attorneys for Defendants
Karen Gold Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Chaim Setareh Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Stanley Saltzman Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Thomas Segal Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Alan Lazar Attorney
Cody Kennedy Attorney
Ashley Cruz Attorneys for Plaintiffs

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Party Notice: MICELI vs DOLLAR TREE STORES, INC.,

Preview

Related Topics

Case Info

Parties