Preview
Keith Gillette (SBN 191082)
Haley L. Hansen (SBN 299082)
BULLIVANT HOUSER BAILEY PC
E“ E EL E ‘
fl .
101 Montgomery Street, Suite 2600 SAN MA?E@ flfiifiN-‘I‘Y
San Francisco, CA 941 04-4146 MAY 2 2 2019
Telephone: 415.352.2700
A8
Facsimile:
E-mail:
415.352.2701
keith.gillette@bullivant.com
haley.hansen@bullivant.com
Wcsefi‘ 0i ”WM
“WW; Mrm
am Cour:
~\§
“MM“
D1696
XV:I
Attorneys for Defendants _
RABPAEW
,
AMERIGAS PROPANE, L.P., AMERIGAS flgggggndum 0f Points
and Authorities
inRep,
V
[I
IIl/IIIIl/Hi/II/Hl/Illll/l/Ill/H/I
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFOREIE_\
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
BRICEIDA LOPEZ, an individual, JOSE Case No.: 18CIV01 696
SOLIS, an individual,
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’
PlaintiffS, AMERIGAS PROPANE, L.P., AMERIGAS
PROPANE, INC., AND AMERIGAS, INC.,
V‘
MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME
PAUL BONIFACIO, an individual; T0 RESPOND T0 PLAINTIFF’S
'
MARGARET HYUN, an individual; DISCOVERY REQUESTS
AMERIGAS PROPANE, INC., a corporation;
AMERIGAS, INC, a corporation; and DOES DATE: May 30, 2019
ONE through ONE-HUNDRED, inclusive, TIME; 9:00 a_m.
DEPT: Law & Motion
Defendants-
COMPLAINT; April 6, 201 8
TRIAL: November 18, 2019
Rather than address all the reasons set forth in the AmériGas defendants’ motion that
good cause exists to grant the AmeriGas defendants an extension, Plaintiffs’ opposition brief
instead focuses on issues that are irrelevant to the pending motion. Indeed, Plaintiffs completely
ignore that they served 342 separate discovery requests on the AmeriGas defendants, refused to
grant any extension of time to respond, and now argue that the AmeriGas defendants exaggerate
the burden imposed by the discovery requests because “The answer for one defendant should,
for the most part, be the answer for the other two defendants.” See Opp. at 2. Thus, in the only
relevant statement from their opposition brief, Plaintiffs appears to concede what counsel for the
~
4846-7442-4727.l 36947100009 — 1 —
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO
PLAINTIFF’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS
Pd
AmeriGas defendants has told counsel for Plaintiffs time and again — the only relevant
h)
AmeriGas entity to this lawsuit is AmeriGas Pmpane, LP. as itwas the Operating Amen'Gas
U)
entity with all the relevant information and documents that are the subj ect of Plaintiffs’
$>
discovery. Plaintiffs’ statements suggest that the discovery directedvtowards AmeriGas,
'UI
Propane, Inc. 0r AmeriGas, Inc. is nothing more than an attempt by Plaintiffs to force AmeriGas
G\
to spend time and money answering discovery on behalf of entities that Plaintiffs readily
\J
acknowledge have no additional responsive information or documents.
“D
Notwithstanding the impropriety of Plaintiffs” requests to AmeriGas Propane, Inc. and
\O AmeriGas, Inca counsel for the AmeriGas defendants are working to respond to the voluminous
<3 requests while working to provide supplemental responses to discovery served on AmeriGas
b‘
Propane, LP. as discussed at the Court’s discovery conference oh May 3, 201 9.
h)
Therefore, AmeriGas respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting
DJ
AmeriGas’ motion and granting an‘y further relief‘the Court deems as just and proper.
¥~
DATED:
HHHepray—w
May 22, 2019
U1
BULLIVANT HOUS‘ER BAILEY PC
O\
\J
Keith Gillm’t
0°
Haley L. Hansen
p—
V3
Attorneys for Defendant
AMERIGAS PROPANE, L.P‘., AMERIGAS
b9 CD
PROPANE, INC, and AMERIGAS, INC.
b)5‘ *****
b9 h)
h) Dd
b44>
h) (A
bJ O\
h) \J
bJ 00
484G—7442-4727.1 36942/00009 -‘2 -
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO
PLAINTIFF’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS
PROOF OF SERVICE
Bricedia Lopez, et a1. v. Paul Bonifacio, et al.
San Mateo Superior Court No. 18CIV01696
I am employed in the City and County of San Francisco by the law firm of Bullivant
Houser Bailey (“the business”), 101 Montgomery Street, Suite 2600, San Francisco, CA 94104.
I am over the age of eighteen (18) and not a paITy to this action. On May 22, 2019, I served the
document entitled:
\DOOQQU‘IAUJN
REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION
FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME T0 RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S
DISCOVERY REQUESTS
upon the following parties:
COUNSEL EMAIL ADDRESSgES)
10 MATTHEW D. DAVIS mdavis@walkuplawoffice.com
SPENCER J. PAHLKE spahlke@walkuplaw0ffice.com
11 Walkup, Melodia, Kelly & Schoenberger kbenzien@walkuplawoffice.com
650 California Street, 26th Floor ssaephan@walkuplawoffice.com
12
San Francisco, CA 94108-261 5
Telephone: 415.98 1 .721 0
13
Facsimile: 415.391.6965
14 Attorneys for: Plaintiffs BRICEIDA LOPEZ and JOSE
SOLIS
15
16
SHAWN A. TOLIVER Shawn.toliver@lewisbrisbois.com
JULIE M. AZEVEDO julie.azevedo@lewisbrisbois.com
17 Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP rose.chan@lewisbrisbois.com
333 Bush Street, Suite 1100
18 San Francisco, CA 941 04-2872
Telephone: 415.362.2580
19
Facsimile: 415.434.0882
20
Attorneys for: Defendants PAUL BONIFACIO and
MARGARET HYUN
21
JAMES T. HULTQUIST jhultquist@reedsmith.com
22 Reed Smith LLP
10 South Wacker Drive
23 Chicago, IL 60606-7507
Telephone: 3 12.207.1000
24 Facsimile: 312.207.6400
Attorneys for: Defendant AMERIGAS PROPANE, LP
25
26 () BY MAIL (CCP $1013(a)): I am readily familiar with the ordinary practice of the
business with respect to the collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with
27 the United States Postal Service. I placed a true and correct copy of the above—titled
document in an envelope addressed as above, with first class postage thereon fully prepaid.
I sealed the aforesaid envelope and placed it for collection and mailing by the United
28
States Postal Service in accordance with the ordinary practice of the business.
4846—7442-4727.1 36942/00009 - 3 -
REPLY IN SUPPORT 0F DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO
PLAINTIFF’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS
Correspondence so placed is ordinarily deposited by the business with the United States.
‘
Postal Service on the same day.
IQ
(x) BY EMAIL 0R ELECTRONIC TRANSFIEI Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation to
b)
electronic service, I caused a copy of the cocument to be sent from e—mail address
robertabeach@bul1ivant.com to the persons at the e—mai] addressed listed in the service
-b list. I did not, within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or
other indication that ‘lhe transmission was mlsuccessful.
U!
() BY FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION jCCP §10131e}, CRC 2.306): I transmitted the
iON document by facsimile transmission by placing it in a facsimile machine (telephone
number 415-352-2701) and fransmittifig it to the facsimile machine telephone number
\J
listed above. A transmission report was properly issued by the transmitting facsimile
machine. The transmission was reported as complete and without error. A true and correct
GO
copy of the transmission report is attached hereto.
‘0 ‘(
) BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY (CCP $101r3(c)): I am readily familiar with the ordinary
practice 0f the business with respect to the collection and processing 0f correspondence
10 for mailing by Express Mail and other carriers providing for overnight delivery. Iplaced
a true and correct copy of the above—titled document in an‘ envelope addressed as above’,
11 with first class postage thereon fully prepaid. I sealed the aforesaid envelope and placed
it for collection and mailing by Express Mail or other carrier for overnight delivery in
12 accordance with the ordinary practice of the business. Correspondence so placed is
ordinarily deposited by the business with Express Mail or other carrier on the same day.
13
( ) BY PERSONAL SERVICE UPON AN ATTORNEY {CCP $101160): Iplaced a true
14 and correct copy of the above-titled document in a sealed envelope addressed as indicated
above. I delivered said envelopes by hand to a receptionist 0r a person authorized t0 accept
15 same at the address on the envelope: or, if no person was present, by leaving the envelope
in a conspicuous place in the office between the hours of nine in the morning and five in
16 the afternoon.
17 () BY MESSENGER SERVICE: I placed a true and correct copy of the above—entitled
document in a sealed envelope addressed as indicated above and provided it to a
18 professional messenger service for delivery during normal business hours on this date.
19 () BY PERSONAL SERVICE UPON A PARTY (CCP $1011(b)): Iplaced a true and
correct copy 0f the above-titled‘ document in a sealed envelope addressed as indicated
20 above. I delivered each envelope by hand to a person of not less than eighteen (1 8) years
of age at the address listed on the envelope, between the hours of eight in the morning and
21 six in the evening,
22 I declare under penalty 0f perjury, under 1116 laws of the State of California, that the
foregoing is true and correct.
23
Exécuted on May 22, 2019, at San Francisco, California.
24
25 vagx1 _
'
i
B
26
27 *****
28
4846—7442-4721] 36942/00009 “4—
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO
PLAINTIFF’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS
Preview
Keith Gillette (SBN 191082) Haley L. Hansen (SBN 299082) BULLIVANT HOUSER BAILEY PC E“ E EL E ‘ fl . 101 Montgomery Street, Suite 2600 SAN MA?E@ flfiifiN-‘I‘Y San Francisco, CA 941 04-4146 MAY 2 2 2019 Telephone: 415.352.2700 A8 Facsimile: E-mail: 415.352.2701 keith.gillette@bullivant.com haley.hansen@bullivant.com Wcsefi‘ 0i ”WM “WW; Mrm am Cour: ~\§ “MM“ D1696 XV:I Attorneys for Defendants _ RABPAEW , AMERIGAS PROPANE, L.P., AMERIGAS flgggggndum 0f Points and Authorities inRep, V [I IIl/IIIIl/Hi/II/Hl/Illll/l/Ill/H/I SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFOREIE_\ COUNTY OF SAN MATEO BRICEIDA LOPEZ, an individual, JOSE Case No.: 18CIV01 696 SOLIS, an individual, REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ PlaintiffS, AMERIGAS PROPANE, L.P., AMERIGAS PROPANE, INC., AND AMERIGAS, INC., V‘ MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME PAUL BONIFACIO, an individual; T0 RESPOND T0 PLAINTIFF’S ' MARGARET HYUN, an individual; DISCOVERY REQUESTS AMERIGAS PROPANE, INC., a corporation; AMERIGAS, INC, a corporation; and DOES DATE: May 30, 2019 ONE through ONE-HUNDRED, inclusive, TIME; 9:00 a_m. DEPT: Law & Motion Defendants- COMPLAINT; April 6, 201 8 TRIAL: November 18, 2019 Rather than address all the reasons set forth in the AmériGas defendants’ motion that good cause exists to grant the AmeriGas defendants an extension, Plaintiffs’ opposition brief instead focuses on issues that are irrelevant to the pending motion. Indeed, Plaintiffs completely ignore that they served 342 separate discovery requests on the AmeriGas defendants, refused to grant any extension of time to respond, and now argue that the AmeriGas defendants exaggerate the burden imposed by the discovery requests because “The answer for one defendant should, for the most part, be the answer for the other two defendants.” See Opp. at 2. Thus, in the only relevant statement from their opposition brief, Plaintiffs appears to concede what counsel for the ~ 4846-7442-4727.l 36947100009 — 1 — REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS Pd AmeriGas defendants has told counsel for Plaintiffs time and again — the only relevant h) AmeriGas entity to this lawsuit is AmeriGas Pmpane, LP. as itwas the Operating Amen'Gas U) entity with all the relevant information and documents that are the subj ect of Plaintiffs’ $> discovery. Plaintiffs’ statements suggest that the discovery directedvtowards AmeriGas, 'UI Propane, Inc. 0r AmeriGas, Inc. is nothing more than an attempt by Plaintiffs to force AmeriGas G\ to spend time and money answering discovery on behalf of entities that Plaintiffs readily \J acknowledge have no additional responsive information or documents. “D Notwithstanding the impropriety of Plaintiffs” requests to AmeriGas Propane, Inc. and \O AmeriGas, Inca counsel for the AmeriGas defendants are working to respond to the voluminous <3 requests while working to provide supplemental responses to discovery served on AmeriGas b‘ Propane, LP. as discussed at the Court’s discovery conference oh May 3, 201 9. h) Therefore, AmeriGas respectfully requests that the Court enter an Order granting DJ AmeriGas’ motion and granting an‘y further relief‘the Court deems as just and proper. ¥~ DATED: HHHepray—w May 22, 2019 U1 BULLIVANT HOUS‘ER BAILEY PC O\ \J Keith Gillm’t 0° Haley L. Hansen p— V3 Attorneys for Defendant AMERIGAS PROPANE, L.P‘., AMERIGAS b9 CD PROPANE, INC, and AMERIGAS, INC. b)5‘ ***** b9 h) h) Dd b44> h) (A bJ O\ h) \J bJ 00 484G—7442-4727.1 36942/00009 -‘2 - REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS PROOF OF SERVICE Bricedia Lopez, et a1. v. Paul Bonifacio, et al. San Mateo Superior Court No. 18CIV01696 I am employed in the City and County of San Francisco by the law firm of Bullivant Houser Bailey (“the business”), 101 Montgomery Street, Suite 2600, San Francisco, CA 94104. I am over the age of eighteen (18) and not a paITy to this action. On May 22, 2019, I served the document entitled: \DOOQQU‘IAUJN REPLY MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME T0 RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS upon the following parties: COUNSEL EMAIL ADDRESSgES) 10 MATTHEW D. DAVIS mdavis@walkuplawoffice.com SPENCER J. PAHLKE spahlke@walkuplaw0ffice.com 11 Walkup, Melodia, Kelly & Schoenberger kbenzien@walkuplawoffice.com 650 California Street, 26th Floor ssaephan@walkuplawoffice.com 12 San Francisco, CA 94108-261 5 Telephone: 415.98 1 .721 0 13 Facsimile: 415.391.6965 14 Attorneys for: Plaintiffs BRICEIDA LOPEZ and JOSE SOLIS 15 16 SHAWN A. TOLIVER Shawn.toliver@lewisbrisbois.com JULIE M. AZEVEDO julie.azevedo@lewisbrisbois.com 17 Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP rose.chan@lewisbrisbois.com 333 Bush Street, Suite 1100 18 San Francisco, CA 941 04-2872 Telephone: 415.362.2580 19 Facsimile: 415.434.0882 20 Attorneys for: Defendants PAUL BONIFACIO and MARGARET HYUN 21 JAMES T. HULTQUIST jhultquist@reedsmith.com 22 Reed Smith LLP 10 South Wacker Drive 23 Chicago, IL 60606-7507 Telephone: 3 12.207.1000 24 Facsimile: 312.207.6400 Attorneys for: Defendant AMERIGAS PROPANE, LP 25 26 () BY MAIL (CCP $1013(a)): I am readily familiar with the ordinary practice of the business with respect to the collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with 27 the United States Postal Service. I placed a true and correct copy of the above—titled document in an envelope addressed as above, with first class postage thereon fully prepaid. I sealed the aforesaid envelope and placed it for collection and mailing by the United 28 States Postal Service in accordance with the ordinary practice of the business. 4846—7442-4727.1 36942/00009 - 3 - REPLY IN SUPPORT 0F DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS Correspondence so placed is ordinarily deposited by the business with the United States. ‘ Postal Service on the same day. IQ (x) BY EMAIL 0R ELECTRONIC TRANSFIEI Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation to b) electronic service, I caused a copy of the cocument to be sent from e—mail address robertabeach@bul1ivant.com to the persons at the e—mai] addressed listed in the service -b list. I did not, within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that ‘lhe transmission was mlsuccessful. U! () BY FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION jCCP §10131e}, CRC 2.306): I transmitted the iON document by facsimile transmission by placing it in a facsimile machine (telephone number 415-352-2701) and fransmittifig it to the facsimile machine telephone number \J listed above. A transmission report was properly issued by the transmitting facsimile machine. The transmission was reported as complete and without error. A true and correct GO copy of the transmission report is attached hereto. ‘0 ‘( ) BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY (CCP $101r3(c)): I am readily familiar with the ordinary practice 0f the business with respect to the collection and processing 0f correspondence 10 for mailing by Express Mail and other carriers providing for overnight delivery. Iplaced a true and correct copy of the above—titled document in an‘ envelope addressed as above’, 11 with first class postage thereon fully prepaid. I sealed the aforesaid envelope and placed it for collection and mailing by Express Mail or other carrier for overnight delivery in 12 accordance with the ordinary practice of the business. Correspondence so placed is ordinarily deposited by the business with Express Mail or other carrier on the same day. 13 ( ) BY PERSONAL SERVICE UPON AN ATTORNEY {CCP $101160): Iplaced a true 14 and correct copy of the above-titled document in a sealed envelope addressed as indicated above. I delivered said envelopes by hand to a receptionist 0r a person authorized t0 accept 15 same at the address on the envelope: or, if no person was present, by leaving the envelope in a conspicuous place in the office between the hours of nine in the morning and five in 16 the afternoon. 17 () BY MESSENGER SERVICE: I placed a true and correct copy of the above—entitled document in a sealed envelope addressed as indicated above and provided it to a 18 professional messenger service for delivery during normal business hours on this date. 19 () BY PERSONAL SERVICE UPON A PARTY (CCP $1011(b)): Iplaced a true and correct copy 0f the above-titled‘ document in a sealed envelope addressed as indicated 20 above. I delivered each envelope by hand to a person of not less than eighteen (1 8) years of age at the address listed on the envelope, between the hours of eight in the morning and 21 six in the evening, 22 I declare under penalty 0f perjury, under 1116 laws of the State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct. 23 Exécuted on May 22, 2019, at San Francisco, California. 24 25 vagx1 _ ' i B 26 27 ***** 28 4846—7442-4721] 36942/00009 “4— REPLY IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO PLAINTIFF’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS