Preview
@IL United States District Court
Central District of California Cristina M. Squieri Bullock
Office 0f the Clerk Chief Deputy of Administration
350 West lst Street, Suite 4311
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Kiry K. Gray Sara Tse Soo H00
District Court Executive / Clerk of Court Chief Deputy of Operations
350 West lst Street, Suite 4311 255 East Temple Street, Suite 'l‘S-l34
Los Angeles, CA 90012 Los Angeles, CA 90012
HEEB/on
August 3, 2021
505,5 CALI
SA N” 99NIAI
BARB
S'anta Barbara Superior Court AU
7 202
1 100
Anacapa Street Om
n aB r ara A l BY “cut/V9 omce r
Re: Case Number: '2z21-cv—0004I—ODW-AFM
Previously Superior Court Case No. 20§2VQ3§ Z Z
Case Name: Butler America, LLC v. UCOMMG, LLC et a1
Dear Sir/Madam:
Pursuant to this Court’s ORDER OF REMAND issued on 08/03/2021 ,the above-referenced
case is hereby remanded to yourjurisdiction.
Attached is a certified copy of the ORDER OF REMAND and a copy of the docket sheet from this Court.
Please acknowledge receipt of the above by signing the enclosed copy of this letter and returning it to the
location shown below. Thank you for your cooperation.
United States Courthouse
255 East Temple Street, Suite TS-134
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Respectfiilly,
Clerk, U.S. District Court
By: /s/ Lori Murana
Deputy Clerk
1ori_muraoka@cacd.uscourts.gov
Encls.
cc: Counsel of record
Receipt is acknowledged of the documents described above.
Clerk Su r10
itive Officer
AUG l 7 202i B
Date Deputy C1 TO
CV-103 (05/18) LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL - REMAND TO SUPERIOR COURT (CIVIL)
l hereby attest and certify on
08/03/21
11234567009
that the foregoing document is full, true
and correct copy of the original on file in JS—6
my office, and in my legal custody. REE
CLERK U.S. DISTRICT COURT W:
CENTRAL DISTRICT CALIFORNIA
DEPUTY CLERK
@Hniteh étates lBifitritt QEuurt
(Central ZBiStritt at @aliturnia
10
11 BUTLER AMERICA, LLC, Case N9 2:21-cv-00041-ODW (AF Mx)
12 Plaintiff,
13 V. ORDER REMANDING ACTION
AND DENYING MOTION TO
14 UCOMMG, LLC, et al., COMPEL ARBITRATION AND
15 Defendants. MOTION TO DISMIss [12][20]
16
17 I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
18 Plaintiff Butler America filed this action in the Superior Court Of California,
19 County of Santa Barbara, against Defendants United Communications Group, Inc.;
20 UCOMMG, LLC; Kenneth W. Newbatt; Bianca Newbatt; Mitchell C. Lipkin;
21 Michael J. Bellas; Jimmie Garrett Baker, Jr. (“Baker”); and WesTele Utility
22 Solutions, LLC (“WesTele”) (collectively, “Defendants”). (Notice of Removal
23 (“NOR”), Ex. A (“Complaint” or “Compl.”), ECF NO. 1-1.) Defendants removed the
24 action based on alleged diversity jurisdiction despite Butler’s allegation that Baker
25 and WesTele are citizens of California. (See Compl. 1H] 19, 21.) On July 28, 2021, the
26 Court ordered the parties to show cause why this action should not be remanded for
27 lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (ECF NO. 31.) Defendants filed a Response in
28
1
support of their contention that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction. (See
I
ECF No.
234567009
Response, 33.)
After reviewing Defendants’ Notice of Removal and Butler’s Complaint, the
Court finds that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this action because the parties
are not completely diverse.‘ Consequently, the Court REMANDS this action to state
'
court. See 28 U.s.c. § 1447(c).2
II. LEGAL STANDARD
Federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction only as authorized by the
Constitution and Congress. U.S. Const. art. III, § 2, cl. 1; see also Kokkonen v.
10 Guardian Life Ins. C0. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). A suit filed in state court
11 may be removed to federal court only if the federal court would have had original
12 jurisdiction over the suit. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(’a). Federal courts have original
13 jurisdiction where an action arises under federal law or where each plaintiff‘s
14 citizenship is diverse from each defendant’s citizenship and the amount in controversy
15 exceeds $75,000. Id. §§ 1331, '1332(a).
16 The removal statute is strictly construed against removal, and “[f]ederal
17 jurisdiction must be rejected if there is any doubt as to the right of removal in the first
18 instance.” Gaus v. Miles, Ina, 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992). The party seeking
19 removal bears the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction. Id. The court must
20 remand the action sua sponte “[i]f at any time before final judgment it appears that the
21 district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.” 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); United Inv’rs
22 Life Ins. C0. v. Waddell & ReedInc., 360 F.3d 960, 967 (9th Cir. 2004).
23
24
25
1
For jurisdictional allegations, the Court looks to the Complaint and Notice of Removal, because
26 “is determined must as of the time the is filed and
diversity jurisdiction (and exist) complaint
27
removal is effected.” Strotek Corp. v. Air Transp.
'
Ass ’n.of Am., 300 F.3d 1129, 1131—32 (9th Cir.
2002).
2
28 Having carefully considered the papers filed in connection with the Motion, the Court deemed the
matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-15.
III. DISCUSSION
1234567009
Defendants inVoke diversity as the basis of the Court’s subject matter
jurisdiction. (NOR ‘fl 1.) The Supreme Court has “consistently interpreted § 1332 as
requiring complete diversity: In a case with multiple plaintiffs and multiple
defendants, the presence in the action of a single plaintiff from the same State as a
single defendant deprives the district courtof original diversity jurisdiction over the
entire action.”. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., Ina, 545 U.S. 546, 553
'
(2005).
“An exception to the requirement of complete diversity exists where it appears
1o that a plaintiff has fraudulently joined a ‘sham’ non-diverse defendan L” Sanchez v.
11 Lane Bryant, Ina, 123 F. Supp. 3d 1238, 1241 (C.D. Cal. 2015). “If the plaintiff fails
12 to state a cause of action against a resident defendant, and the failure is. obvious
13 according to the settled rules of the state, the joinder of the resident defendant is
14 fraudulent.” Hamilton Materials, Inc. v. Dow Chem. Corp, 494 F.3d 1203, 1206
15 (9th Cir. 2007) (quoting McCabe v. Gen. Foods Corp, 811 F.2d 1336, 1339 (9th Cir.
16 1987)). There is a strong presumption against fraudulent joinder, and thus,
17 “[flraudulent joinder must be proven by clear and convincing evidence.” Hamilton
1s Materials, 494 F.3d at 1206.
19 Merely showing that an action is likely to be dismissed against the alleged sham
20 defendant does not demonstrate fraudulent joinder. See Grancare, LLC v. Thrower by
21 & through Mills, 889 F.3d 543, 550 (9th Cir. 2018). This is because the standard for
22 establishing fraudulent joinder is more exacting than that'for dismissal for failure to
23 state a claim. Id. at 549. “[I]f there is a possibility that a state court‘would find that
24 the complaint states a cause of action against any of 'the resident defendants, the
25 federal court must find that the joinder was proper and remand the case to the state
26 court.” Id. at 548 (quoting Hunter v. Philip Morris USA, 582 F.3d 1039, 1046
V
27 (9th Cir. 2009)).
28
Defendants to invoke because Butler is a
11234567009
Here, attempt diversity jurisdiction
citizen of California and Delaware, and some Defendants are citizens of Washington,
Minnesota, and North Carolina. (NOR 1W 8—15.) Butler alleges that Baker and
WesTele are citizens of California, but Defendants contend that the Court should
disregard Baker’s and WesTele’s California citizenship because they were
fraudulentlyjoined. (Compl. 1H] 19, 21; NOR 1m 17—23.)
Defendants fail to show there is no possibility that Butler can state a claim
against either Baker or WesTele. According to the allegations in the Complaint,
Baker is an individual who is alleged to have misappropriated Butler’s trade secrets,
10 and WesTele is a company which is alleged to have benefited from that
11 misappropriation. (Compl. 1152.) Defendants attempt to reduce Butler’s claims
12 against Baker to contract claims based on non-compete clauses Defendants contend
13 are unenforceable, but Butler has asserted more than merely contract claims against
14 Baker. (NOR 1] 21.) Defendants did not attempt to argue that the non-contract claims
15 against Baker are insufficient. Accordingly, Defendants have not demonstrated that
16 Butler failed to state any claim at all against Baker, and Defendants certainly have not
17 Shown by clear and convincing evidence that there is no possibility of stating a claim
i
18 against Baker. (Accord Grancare, 889 F.3d at 549—50 (discussing the clear and
19 convincing evidence standard under which a defendant must show that there is no
20 possibility a plaintiff could recover against a non-diverse defendant to establish
21 fraudulent joinder). And even assuming Butler’s allegations are insufficient,
22 Defendants fail to establish that Butler could not cure any potential deficiency in a
23 future amendment. See id. at 550 (“[T]he district court must consider. . . whether a
24 deficiency in the complaint can possibly be cured by granting the plaintiff leave to
25 amend”); Revay v. Home Depot USA, Ina, No. 2:14-CV-03391-RSWL (ASX), 2015
26 WL 1285287, at *3 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2015) (emphasis added) (quoting Hunter,
27 582 F.3d at 1044) (“If there is ‘any possibility that the state law might impose liability
28 on a resident defendant under the circumstances alleged in the complaint,’ or in a
amended ‘the federal court cannot find that joinder of the resident
1234567009
future complaint,
defendant-was fraudulent, and remand is necessary.’”).
AcCordingly, the Court finds that either Baker or WesTele or both were
properly joined, and the Court cannot disregard their California citizenship. As there
is not complete diversity, the Court must remand. See Gaus, 980 F.2d at 566.
IV. CONCLUSION
For the reasons discussed above, the Court REMANDS this action to the
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Barbara, 1100 Anacapa Street, Santa
Barbara, California, Case" No. 20CV03877. Defendants’ Motion to Compel
10 Arbitration and Motion to Dismiss are DENIED AS MOOT. (ECF Nos. 12, 20.)i
‘
11 The Clerk of the Court shall close the case.
12
13 IT IS SO ORDERED.
l4
'W
15 August 3, 2021
16
17
18
OTIS D. W GHT, II
UNITED STATES ISTRICT JUDGE
l9
20
21
22
23
24
2S
26
27
28
CM/ECF - California Central District" https://eéf.cacd.uscouns.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?145342623614723-L_1_0-1
Query Reports Qtilities Help Log Out
ACCO,NORTHERN,(AFMX),CLOSED,DISCOVERY,MANADR,REMANDED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (Western Division - Los Angeles)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:21-cv-000414ODW-AFM
Butler America, LLC v. UCOMMG, LLC et al Date Filed: 01/04/2021
Assigned to: Judge Otis D. Wright, II Date Terminated: 08/03/2021
Referred to: Magistrate Judge Alexander F. MacKinnon Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Case in other court: Santa Barbara Superior Court, 20CV03877 Nature of Suit: 190 Contract: Other
Cause: 2821332 Diversity-Petition for Removal Jurisdiction: Diversity
Plaintiff
Butler America, LLC represented by Cameron H Totten
a Delaware limited liability company Chora Young and Manasserian
650 Sierra Madre Villa Avenue Suite 304
Pasadena, CA 91107
Ihereby attest and certify on 08/03/21 626-744-1838
that the foregoing document is full, true Email: cameron@cym.law
and correct copy of the original on file in _,
my office, and in my legal custody. $31 LEAD ATTORNEY
CLERK U.S. DISTRICT COURT at»: ATTORNEY T0 BE NOTICED
[A /. Ill ’
CENTRAL DISTRICT 5 CALIFORNIA
Joseph Chora
DEPUTY CLERK
Chora Young LLP
650 Sierra Madre Villa Avenue Suite 102
Pasadena, CA 91107
626-744~1838
Email: joseph@chorayoungllp.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Paul Philip Young
Chora Young LLP
2667 East Colorado Boulevard Suite B
Pasadena, CA 91107
626-744-183 8
Fax: 626-744-3167
v
Email: paul@cym.law
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
V. ~
Defendant
lof8 8/3/2021, 1:16 PM
CM/ECF - California Central‘ District https://ecficacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?145342623614723-L_l_0-1
K
UCOMMG, LLC represented by Shayna Balch Santiago
a‘Nevada limited liability company Fisher and Phillips LLP
3200 North Central Avenue Suite 1550
Phoenix, AZ 85012-2487
602-281-3406
Fax: 602-281-3401
Email: sbalch@fisherphillips.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY T0 BE NOTICED
Kathryn Maria Evans
Fisher and Phillips
4747 Executive Drive Suite 1000
San Diego, CA 92121
858-597-9600
. Email: kmevans@fisherphillips.com
ATTORNEY T0 BE NOTICED
Defendant
Unified Communications Group, Inc. represented by Kathryn Maria Evans
a dissolved Washington corporation (See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Defendant
Kenneth Newbatt represented by Shayna Balch Santiago
an individual (See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kathryn Maria Evans
(See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Defendant
Bianca Newbatt represented by Kathryn Maria Evans
an individual (See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Defendant
Mitchell C Lipkin represented by Kathryn Maria Evans
an individual (See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Defendant
Michael J Bellas represented by Kathryn Maria Evans
an individual (See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Defendant
20f8 8/3/2021, 1:16 PM
CM/ECF - California Central District https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?145342623614723-L_1_0-l
Jimmie Garrett Baker represented by Kathryn Maria Evans
an individual (See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Defendant
Westele Utility Solutions, LLC represented by Kathryn Maria Evans
a California limited liability company (See above for address)
ATTORNEY T0 BE NOTICED
Defendant
Cynthia Baker represented by Kathryn Maria Evans
(See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Defendant
DOES
1 through 50, inclusive
Date Filed Docket Text
01/04/2021 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Santa Barbara Superior Court, case number 20CV03877
- Fee:
Receipt No: ACACDC-29857402 $402, filed by Defendants Kenneth Newbatt,
UCOMMG, LLC. (Attachments: # 1
Supplement Notice of Removal Part 2, # 2 Exhibit
Exhibit A -.Summons and Complaint Part 1, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit A - Summons and
- SB ROA, # é Exhibit Exhibit C - Ntc to
Complaint Part 2, # 4 Exhibit Exhibit B
Adverse Party of Removal, # Q Exhibit Exhibit D - Ntc to State Court of Removal, # Z
Declaration Dec of Cynthia Baker, # § Declaration Dec of BiancaNewbatt, # 9
Declaration Dec of Jimmie Garrett Baker Jr, # m Declaration Dec of Kenneth Newbatt,
# ll Declaration Dec of Mitchell Lipkin) (Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to
party Kenneth Newbatt(pty:dft), Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party
UCOMMG, LLC(pty:dft))(Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 01/04/2021)
CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendants Kenneth Newbatt, UCOMMG, LLC.
IN
01/04/2021
(Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 01/04/2021)
Defendants NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendants Kenneth Newbatt,
ILA)
01/04/2021 ~
UCOMMG, LLC, identifying UCOMMG, LLC, Unified Communications Group, Inc.,
Kenneth W. Newbatt, Bianca Newbatt, Mitchell C. Lipkin, Michael J. Bellas, Jimmie
Garrett Baker Jr., WesTele Utility Solutions, LLC, Butler America, LLC. (Evans,
Kathryn) (Entered: 01/04/2021)
01/04/2021 CONFORMED COPY OF COMPLAINT filed by plaintiff Butler America, LLC in
Santa Barbara Superior Court on 11/20/2020, attached as Exhibit A.. (jtil) (Entered:
01/06/2021)
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Otis D. Wright, II and Magistrate Judge
14>
01/06/2021
Alexander F. MacKinnon. (itil) (Entered: 01/06/2021)
NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed.
ILII
01/06/2021 (jtil)
(Entered: 01/06/2021)
3of8 8/3/2021, 1:16 PM
CM/ECF - California Central District https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi—bin/DktRpt.pl?1453426236]4723-L_l_O-l
01/07/2021 MINUTE ORDER CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D Wright, II: This action has been
Ia
1N
assigned to the calendar of Judge Otis D. Wright II. Counsel are STRONGLY
encouraged to review the Central Districts website for additional information. The
parties may consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge appearing on the voluntary
consent list. PLEASE refer to Local Rule 79-5 for the submission of CIVIL ONLY
SEALED DOCUMENTS. CRIMINAL SEALED DOCUMENTS will remain the same.
Please refer to the Judges procedures and schedules for detailed instructions for
submission of sealed documents. (1c) (Entered: 01/07/2021)
DECLARATION of Michael Bellas re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case
l\1
01/11/2021
Opening),,, I filed by Defendants Kenneth Newbatt, UCOMMG, LLC. (Evans,
Kathryn) (Entered: 01/11/2021)
Joint STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Mitchell C Lipkin
I00
01/11/2021
answer now due 1/25/2021; Unified Communications Group, Inc. answer now due
1/25/2021; Michael J Bellas answer now due 1/25/2021; Westele Utility Solutions, LLC
answer now due 1/25/2021; UCOMMG, LLC answer now due 1/25/2021; Jimmie
Garrett Baker answer now due 1/25/2021; Kenneth Newbatt answer now due
1/25/2021; Bianca Newbatt answer now due 1/25/2021, re Complaint - (Discovery)
filed by Defendants Mitchell C Lipkin; Unified Communications Group, Inc.; Michael J
Bellas; Westele Utility Solutions, LLC; UCOMMG, LLC; Jimmie Garrett Baker;
Kenneth Newbatt; Bianca Newbatt.(Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party
Jimmie Garrett Baker(pty:dft), Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party Michael J
Bellas(pty:dft), Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party Mitchell C
Lipkin(pty:dft), Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party Bianca Newbatt(pty:dft),
Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party Unified Communications Group,
lnc.(pty:dfi), Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party Westele Utility Solutions,
LLC(pty:dft))(Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 01/11/2021)
Joint STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer to March 26, 2021
l\o
01/25/2021 re
Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening),,, I , Complaint
- (Discovery), Joint
STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Responsive Pleading and Motion to
Remand filed by Defendants Jimmie Garrett Baker, Michael J Bellas, Mitchell C
Lipkin, Bianca Newbatt, Kenneth Newbatt, UCOMMG, LLC, Unified Communications
Group, Inc., Westele Utility Solutions, LLC. (Attachments: # I Proposed Order
Proposed Order - Joint Stip to Extend Time to Respond to Complaint adn File Motion
to Remand)(Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 01/25/2021)
01/26/2021 10 ORDER REGARDING JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR
DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO THE INITIAL COMPLAINT TO MARCH 26,
2021 AND FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE A MOTION TO REMAND TO APRIL 4, 2021
9 , by Judge Otis D. Wright, ll (1c) Modified on 1/26/2021 (lc). (Entered: 01/26/2021)
03/26/2021 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff Butler America, LLC ’s
Complaint Against Defs UCOMMG, LLC, Unified Communications Group, Ina,
Kenneth NeWbatt, Bianca Newbatt, Mitchell Lipkin, Michael Bellas, and WesTele Utility
Solutions, LLC, NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case pusruant to
Rule 12(b)(6) filed by Defendants Mitchell C Lipkin, Unified Communications Group,
Inc., Michael J Bellas, Westele Utility Solutions, LLC, UCOMMG, LLC, Kenneth
Newbatt, Bianca Newbatt. Motion set for hearing on 4/26/2021 at 01:30 PM before
Judge Otis D. Wright II.(Attachments: # I Memorandum MPA ISO Defendants Mtn to
Dismiss, # 2 Declaration Dec of Shayna Balch ISO Defendants Mtn to Dismiss, # i
Declaration Dec of M Bellas ISO Defendants Mtn to Dismiss, # fl Declaration Dec of B
4of8 8/3/2021, 1:16 PM
CM/ECF - California Central District https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?145342623614723-L_1_0-1
Newbatt ISO Defendants Mtn to Dismiss, # é Declaration Dec of K Newbatt ISO
Defendants Mtn to Dismiss, # é Declaration Dec of M Lipkin ISO Defendants Mtn to
Dismiss, # Z Proposed Order Proposed Order re Defendants Mtn to Dismiss) (Evans,
Kathryn) (Entered: 03/26/2021)
03/26/2021 12 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Compel Arbitration filed by Defendant
Jimmie Garrett Baker. Motion set for hearing on 4/26/2021 at 01:30 PM before Judge
Otis D. Wright II.(Attachments: # I Memorandum MPA ISO Defendant's MTC
Arbitration, # 2 Declaration Dec of Shayna Balch ISO Defendant's MTC Arbitration, #
3 Exhibit EX A to Dec of Shayna Balch ISO Defendant's MTC Arbitration, # fl
Proposed-Order Proposed Order Re ISO Defendant's MTC Arbitration) (Evans,
Kathryn) (Entered: 03/26/2021)
04/05/2021 13 Opposition re: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Compel Arbitration Q re
Defendant Jimmie Garrett Baker, Jr’s filed by Plaintiff Butler America, LLC. (Totten,
Cameron) (Entered: 04/05/2021)
04/ 07/2021 _14 NOTICE OF NON-OPPOSITION to NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to
Dismiss Plaintiff Butler America, LLC ’s Corhplaint Against Defs UCOMMG, LLC,
Unified Communications Group, Inc.,Kenneth Newbatt, Bianca Newbatt, Mitchell
Lipkin, Michael Bellas, and WesTele Utility Solutions, NOTICE 0F MOTION AND
MOTION to Dismiss Case pusruant to Rule 12(b) (6) fl filed by Defendants Michael J
Bellas, Mitchell C Lipkin, Bianca Newbatt, Kenneth Newbatt, UCOMMG, LLC, Unified
Communications Group, Inc., Westele Utility Solutions, LLC. (Evans, Kathryn)
(Entered: 04/07/2021)
04/12/2021 15 REPLY Support NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Compel Arbitration Q filed
by Defendant Jimmie Garrett Baker. (Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 04/ 12/2021)
04/1 6/2021 16 First AMENDED COMPLAINT All Defendants amending Complaint - (Discovery),
filed by Plaintiff Butler America, LLC (Attachments: # l Exhibit)(Totten, Cameron)
(Entered: 04/16/2021)
04/19/2021 17 The hearing on the MOTION to Compel Arbitration Q , scheduled for April 26, 2021
at 1:30 P.M., is hereby VACATED and taken off calendar. No appearances are
necessary. The matter stands submitted, and will be decided upon without oral
argument. An'order will issue.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED
WITH THIS ENTRY. (sce) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 04/ 19/2021)
04/19/2021 18 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT fl by Judge Otis D. Wright, II
: On April 16, 2021 Plaintiff filed amended complaint. As the pending motion to
dismiss was based on a complaint that is no longer operative, the motion is DENIED as
MOOT. (1c) (Entered: 04/ 19/2021)
04/20/2021 19 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: First
Amended Complaint/Petition E . The following error(s) was/were found: Caption of
document is incomplete/incorrect. FRCP 10 requires all parties be named on the
caption. Filer has "et als" in defendant area. Clerk attempted to search pleading for
named defendants Body text named Cynthia Baker and Does 1-50 not on caption, but
has stopped searching for anymore parties not named on the caption and leaves filer to
ascertain his named defendants as appropriate. In response to this notice, the Court may:
(1) order an amended or correct document tobe filed; (2) order the document stricken;
or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in
response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (1c) (Entered:
50f8 8/3/2021, 1:16 PM
CM/ECF - California Central District https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?145342623614723-L_1_0-1
04/20/2021)
04/3 0/2021 20 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Defendants Mitchell C Lipkin,
Unified Communications Group, Inc., Michael J Bellas, Westele Utility Solutions, LLC,
UCOMMG, LLC, Kenneth Newbatt, Bianca Newbatt , NOTICE OF MOTION AND
MOTION to Dismiss Case pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) filed by Defendants Mitchell C
Lipkin, Unified Communications Group, Inc., Michael J Bellas, Westele Utility
Solutions, LLC, UCOMMG, LLC, Kenneth Newbatt, Bianca Newbatt. Motion set for
hearing on 6/7/2021 at 01 :30 PM before Judge Otis D. Wright II. (Attachments: # l
Memorandum MPA ISO Defendants Mtn to Dismiss, # 2 Declaration DEC of Kenneth
Preview
@IL United States District Court Central District of California Cristina M. Squieri Bullock Office 0f the Clerk Chief Deputy of Administration 350 West lst Street, Suite 4311 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Kiry K. Gray Sara Tse Soo H00 District Court Executive / Clerk of Court Chief Deputy of Operations 350 West lst Street, Suite 4311 255 East Temple Street, Suite 'l‘S-l34 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Los Angeles, CA 90012 HEEB/on August 3, 2021 505,5 CALI SA N” 99NIAI BARB S'anta Barbara Superior Court AU 7 202 1 100 Anacapa Street Om n aB r ara A l BY “cut/V9 omce r Re: Case Number: '2z21-cv—0004I—ODW-AFM Previously Superior Court Case No. 20§2VQ3§ Z Z Case Name: Butler America, LLC v. UCOMMG, LLC et a1 Dear Sir/Madam: Pursuant to this Court’s ORDER OF REMAND issued on 08/03/2021 ,the above-referenced case is hereby remanded to yourjurisdiction. Attached is a certified copy of the ORDER OF REMAND and a copy of the docket sheet from this Court. Please acknowledge receipt of the above by signing the enclosed copy of this letter and returning it to the location shown below. Thank you for your cooperation. United States Courthouse 255 East Temple Street, Suite TS-134 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Respectfiilly, Clerk, U.S. District Court By: /s/ Lori Murana Deputy Clerk 1ori_muraoka@cacd.uscourts.gov Encls. cc: Counsel of record Receipt is acknowledged of the documents described above. Clerk Su r10 itive Officer AUG l 7 202i B Date Deputy C1 TO CV-103 (05/18) LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL - REMAND TO SUPERIOR COURT (CIVIL) l hereby attest and certify on 08/03/21 11234567009 that the foregoing document is full, true and correct copy of the original on file in JS—6 my office, and in my legal custody. REE CLERK U.S. DISTRICT COURT W: CENTRAL DISTRICT CALIFORNIA DEPUTY CLERK @Hniteh étates lBifitritt QEuurt (Central ZBiStritt at @aliturnia 10 11 BUTLER AMERICA, LLC, Case N9 2:21-cv-00041-ODW (AF Mx) 12 Plaintiff, 13 V. ORDER REMANDING ACTION AND DENYING MOTION TO 14 UCOMMG, LLC, et al., COMPEL ARBITRATION AND 15 Defendants. MOTION TO DISMIss [12][20] 16 17 I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 18 Plaintiff Butler America filed this action in the Superior Court Of California, 19 County of Santa Barbara, against Defendants United Communications Group, Inc.; 20 UCOMMG, LLC; Kenneth W. Newbatt; Bianca Newbatt; Mitchell C. Lipkin; 21 Michael J. Bellas; Jimmie Garrett Baker, Jr. (“Baker”); and WesTele Utility 22 Solutions, LLC (“WesTele”) (collectively, “Defendants”). (Notice of Removal 23 (“NOR”), Ex. A (“Complaint” or “Compl.”), ECF NO. 1-1.) Defendants removed the 24 action based on alleged diversity jurisdiction despite Butler’s allegation that Baker 25 and WesTele are citizens of California. (See Compl. 1H] 19, 21.) On July 28, 2021, the 26 Court ordered the parties to show cause why this action should not be remanded for 27 lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (ECF NO. 31.) Defendants filed a Response in 28 1 support of their contention that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction. (See I ECF No. 234567009 Response, 33.) After reviewing Defendants’ Notice of Removal and Butler’s Complaint, the Court finds that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over this action because the parties are not completely diverse.‘ Consequently, the Court REMANDS this action to state ' court. See 28 U.s.c. § 1447(c).2 II. LEGAL STANDARD Federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction only as authorized by the Constitution and Congress. U.S. Const. art. III, § 2, cl. 1; see also Kokkonen v. 10 Guardian Life Ins. C0. of Am., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994). A suit filed in state court 11 may be removed to federal court only if the federal court would have had original 12 jurisdiction over the suit. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(’a). Federal courts have original 13 jurisdiction where an action arises under federal law or where each plaintiff‘s 14 citizenship is diverse from each defendant’s citizenship and the amount in controversy 15 exceeds $75,000. Id. §§ 1331, '1332(a). 16 The removal statute is strictly construed against removal, and “[f]ederal 17 jurisdiction must be rejected if there is any doubt as to the right of removal in the first 18 instance.” Gaus v. Miles, Ina, 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992). The party seeking 19 removal bears the burden of establishing federal jurisdiction. Id. The court must 20 remand the action sua sponte “[i]f at any time before final judgment it appears that the 21 district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.” 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c); United Inv’rs 22 Life Ins. C0. v. Waddell & ReedInc., 360 F.3d 960, 967 (9th Cir. 2004). 23 24 25 1 For jurisdictional allegations, the Court looks to the Complaint and Notice of Removal, because 26 “is determined must as of the time the is filed and diversity jurisdiction (and exist) complaint 27 removal is effected.” Strotek Corp. v. Air Transp. ' Ass ’n.of Am., 300 F.3d 1129, 1131—32 (9th Cir. 2002). 2 28 Having carefully considered the papers filed in connection with the Motion, the Court deemed the matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. Civ. P. 78; C.D. Cal. L.R. 7-15. III. DISCUSSION 1234567009 Defendants inVoke diversity as the basis of the Court’s subject matter jurisdiction. (NOR ‘fl 1.) The Supreme Court has “consistently interpreted § 1332 as requiring complete diversity: In a case with multiple plaintiffs and multiple defendants, the presence in the action of a single plaintiff from the same State as a single defendant deprives the district courtof original diversity jurisdiction over the entire action.”. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., Ina, 545 U.S. 546, 553 ' (2005). “An exception to the requirement of complete diversity exists where it appears 1o that a plaintiff has fraudulently joined a ‘sham’ non-diverse defendan L” Sanchez v. 11 Lane Bryant, Ina, 123 F. Supp. 3d 1238, 1241 (C.D. Cal. 2015). “If the plaintiff fails 12 to state a cause of action against a resident defendant, and the failure is. obvious 13 according to the settled rules of the state, the joinder of the resident defendant is 14 fraudulent.” Hamilton Materials, Inc. v. Dow Chem. Corp, 494 F.3d 1203, 1206 15 (9th Cir. 2007) (quoting McCabe v. Gen. Foods Corp, 811 F.2d 1336, 1339 (9th Cir. 16 1987)). There is a strong presumption against fraudulent joinder, and thus, 17 “[flraudulent joinder must be proven by clear and convincing evidence.” Hamilton 1s Materials, 494 F.3d at 1206. 19 Merely showing that an action is likely to be dismissed against the alleged sham 20 defendant does not demonstrate fraudulent joinder. See Grancare, LLC v. Thrower by 21 & through Mills, 889 F.3d 543, 550 (9th Cir. 2018). This is because the standard for 22 establishing fraudulent joinder is more exacting than that'for dismissal for failure to 23 state a claim. Id. at 549. “[I]f there is a possibility that a state court‘would find that 24 the complaint states a cause of action against any of 'the resident defendants, the 25 federal court must find that the joinder was proper and remand the case to the state 26 court.” Id. at 548 (quoting Hunter v. Philip Morris USA, 582 F.3d 1039, 1046 V 27 (9th Cir. 2009)). 28 Defendants to invoke because Butler is a 11234567009 Here, attempt diversity jurisdiction citizen of California and Delaware, and some Defendants are citizens of Washington, Minnesota, and North Carolina. (NOR 1W 8—15.) Butler alleges that Baker and WesTele are citizens of California, but Defendants contend that the Court should disregard Baker’s and WesTele’s California citizenship because they were fraudulentlyjoined. (Compl. 1H] 19, 21; NOR 1m 17—23.) Defendants fail to show there is no possibility that Butler can state a claim against either Baker or WesTele. According to the allegations in the Complaint, Baker is an individual who is alleged to have misappropriated Butler’s trade secrets, 10 and WesTele is a company which is alleged to have benefited from that 11 misappropriation. (Compl. 1152.) Defendants attempt to reduce Butler’s claims 12 against Baker to contract claims based on non-compete clauses Defendants contend 13 are unenforceable, but Butler has asserted more than merely contract claims against 14 Baker. (NOR 1] 21.) Defendants did not attempt to argue that the non-contract claims 15 against Baker are insufficient. Accordingly, Defendants have not demonstrated that 16 Butler failed to state any claim at all against Baker, and Defendants certainly have not 17 Shown by clear and convincing evidence that there is no possibility of stating a claim i 18 against Baker. (Accord Grancare, 889 F.3d at 549—50 (discussing the clear and 19 convincing evidence standard under which a defendant must show that there is no 20 possibility a plaintiff could recover against a non-diverse defendant to establish 21 fraudulent joinder). And even assuming Butler’s allegations are insufficient, 22 Defendants fail to establish that Butler could not cure any potential deficiency in a 23 future amendment. See id. at 550 (“[T]he district court must consider. . . whether a 24 deficiency in the complaint can possibly be cured by granting the plaintiff leave to 25 amend”); Revay v. Home Depot USA, Ina, No. 2:14-CV-03391-RSWL (ASX), 2015 26 WL 1285287, at *3 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 19, 2015) (emphasis added) (quoting Hunter, 27 582 F.3d at 1044) (“If there is ‘any possibility that the state law might impose liability 28 on a resident defendant under the circumstances alleged in the complaint,’ or in a amended ‘the federal court cannot find that joinder of the resident 1234567009 future complaint, defendant-was fraudulent, and remand is necessary.’”). AcCordingly, the Court finds that either Baker or WesTele or both were properly joined, and the Court cannot disregard their California citizenship. As there is not complete diversity, the Court must remand. See Gaus, 980 F.2d at 566. IV. CONCLUSION For the reasons discussed above, the Court REMANDS this action to the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Barbara, 1100 Anacapa Street, Santa Barbara, California, Case" No. 20CV03877. Defendants’ Motion to Compel 10 Arbitration and Motion to Dismiss are DENIED AS MOOT. (ECF Nos. 12, 20.)i ‘ 11 The Clerk of the Court shall close the case. 12 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. l4 'W 15 August 3, 2021 16 17 18 OTIS D. W GHT, II UNITED STATES ISTRICT JUDGE l9 20 21 22 23 24 2S 26 27 28 CM/ECF - California Central District" https://eéf.cacd.uscouns.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?145342623614723-L_1_0-1 Query Reports Qtilities Help Log Out ACCO,NORTHERN,(AFMX),CLOSED,DISCOVERY,MANADR,REMANDED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (Western Division - Los Angeles) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:21-cv-000414ODW-AFM Butler America, LLC v. UCOMMG, LLC et al Date Filed: 01/04/2021 Assigned to: Judge Otis D. Wright, II Date Terminated: 08/03/2021 Referred to: Magistrate Judge Alexander F. MacKinnon Jury Demand: Plaintiff Case in other court: Santa Barbara Superior Court, 20CV03877 Nature of Suit: 190 Contract: Other Cause: 2821332 Diversity-Petition for Removal Jurisdiction: Diversity Plaintiff Butler America, LLC represented by Cameron H Totten a Delaware limited liability company Chora Young and Manasserian 650 Sierra Madre Villa Avenue Suite 304 Pasadena, CA 91107 Ihereby attest and certify on 08/03/21 626-744-1838 that the foregoing document is full, true Email: cameron@cym.law and correct copy of the original on file in _, my office, and in my legal custody. $31 LEAD ATTORNEY CLERK U.S. DISTRICT COURT at»: ATTORNEY T0 BE NOTICED [A /. Ill ’ CENTRAL DISTRICT 5 CALIFORNIA Joseph Chora DEPUTY CLERK Chora Young LLP 650 Sierra Madre Villa Avenue Suite 102 Pasadena, CA 91107 626-744~1838 Email: joseph@chorayoungllp.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Paul Philip Young Chora Young LLP 2667 East Colorado Boulevard Suite B Pasadena, CA 91107 626-744-183 8 Fax: 626-744-3167 v Email: paul@cym.law LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED V. ~ Defendant lof8 8/3/2021, 1:16 PM CM/ECF - California Central‘ District https://ecficacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?145342623614723-L_l_0-1 K UCOMMG, LLC represented by Shayna Balch Santiago a‘Nevada limited liability company Fisher and Phillips LLP 3200 North Central Avenue Suite 1550 Phoenix, AZ 85012-2487 602-281-3406 Fax: 602-281-3401 Email: sbalch@fisherphillips.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY T0 BE NOTICED Kathryn Maria Evans Fisher and Phillips 4747 Executive Drive Suite 1000 San Diego, CA 92121 858-597-9600 . Email: kmevans@fisherphillips.com ATTORNEY T0 BE NOTICED Defendant Unified Communications Group, Inc. represented by Kathryn Maria Evans a dissolved Washington corporation (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Defendant Kenneth Newbatt represented by Shayna Balch Santiago an individual (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Kathryn Maria Evans (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Defendant Bianca Newbatt represented by Kathryn Maria Evans an individual (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Defendant Mitchell C Lipkin represented by Kathryn Maria Evans an individual (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Defendant Michael J Bellas represented by Kathryn Maria Evans an individual (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Defendant 20f8 8/3/2021, 1:16 PM CM/ECF - California Central District https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?145342623614723-L_1_0-l Jimmie Garrett Baker represented by Kathryn Maria Evans an individual (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Defendant Westele Utility Solutions, LLC represented by Kathryn Maria Evans a California limited liability company (See above for address) ATTORNEY T0 BE NOTICED Defendant Cynthia Baker represented by Kathryn Maria Evans (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED Defendant DOES 1 through 50, inclusive Date Filed Docket Text 01/04/2021 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Santa Barbara Superior Court, case number 20CV03877 - Fee: Receipt No: ACACDC-29857402 $402, filed by Defendants Kenneth Newbatt, UCOMMG, LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Notice of Removal Part 2, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit A -.Summons and Complaint Part 1, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit A - Summons and - SB ROA, # é Exhibit Exhibit C - Ntc to Complaint Part 2, # 4 Exhibit Exhibit B Adverse Party of Removal, # Q Exhibit Exhibit D - Ntc to State Court of Removal, # Z Declaration Dec of Cynthia Baker, # § Declaration Dec of BiancaNewbatt, # 9 Declaration Dec of Jimmie Garrett Baker Jr, # m Declaration Dec of Kenneth Newbatt, # ll Declaration Dec of Mitchell Lipkin) (Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party Kenneth Newbatt(pty:dft), Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party UCOMMG, LLC(pty:dft))(Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 01/04/2021) CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Defendants Kenneth Newbatt, UCOMMG, LLC. IN 01/04/2021 (Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 01/04/2021) Defendants NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendants Kenneth Newbatt, ILA) 01/04/2021 ~ UCOMMG, LLC, identifying UCOMMG, LLC, Unified Communications Group, Inc., Kenneth W. Newbatt, Bianca Newbatt, Mitchell C. Lipkin, Michael J. Bellas, Jimmie Garrett Baker Jr., WesTele Utility Solutions, LLC, Butler America, LLC. (Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 01/04/2021) 01/04/2021 CONFORMED COPY OF COMPLAINT filed by plaintiff Butler America, LLC in Santa Barbara Superior Court on 11/20/2020, attached as Exhibit A.. (jtil) (Entered: 01/06/2021) NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Otis D. Wright, II and Magistrate Judge 14> 01/06/2021 Alexander F. MacKinnon. (itil) (Entered: 01/06/2021) NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. ILII 01/06/2021 (jtil) (Entered: 01/06/2021) 3of8 8/3/2021, 1:16 PM CM/ECF - California Central District https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi—bin/DktRpt.pl?1453426236]4723-L_l_O-l 01/07/2021 MINUTE ORDER CHAMBERS by Judge Otis D Wright, II: This action has been Ia 1N assigned to the calendar of Judge Otis D. Wright II. Counsel are STRONGLY encouraged to review the Central Districts website for additional information. The parties may consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge appearing on the voluntary consent list. PLEASE refer to Local Rule 79-5 for the submission of CIVIL ONLY SEALED DOCUMENTS. CRIMINAL SEALED DOCUMENTS will remain the same. Please refer to the Judges procedures and schedules for detailed instructions for submission of sealed documents. (1c) (Entered: 01/07/2021) DECLARATION of Michael Bellas re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case l\1 01/11/2021 Opening),,, I filed by Defendants Kenneth Newbatt, UCOMMG, LLC. (Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 01/11/2021) Joint STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Mitchell C Lipkin I00 01/11/2021 answer now due 1/25/2021; Unified Communications Group, Inc. answer now due 1/25/2021; Michael J Bellas answer now due 1/25/2021; Westele Utility Solutions, LLC answer now due 1/25/2021; UCOMMG, LLC answer now due 1/25/2021; Jimmie Garrett Baker answer now due 1/25/2021; Kenneth Newbatt answer now due 1/25/2021; Bianca Newbatt answer now due 1/25/2021, re Complaint - (Discovery) filed by Defendants Mitchell C Lipkin; Unified Communications Group, Inc.; Michael J Bellas; Westele Utility Solutions, LLC; UCOMMG, LLC; Jimmie Garrett Baker; Kenneth Newbatt; Bianca Newbatt.(Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party Jimmie Garrett Baker(pty:dft), Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party Michael J Bellas(pty:dft), Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party Mitchell C Lipkin(pty:dft), Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party Bianca Newbatt(pty:dft), Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party Unified Communications Group, lnc.(pty:dfi), Attorney Kathryn Maria Evans added to party Westele Utility Solutions, LLC(pty:dft))(Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 01/11/2021) Joint STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer to March 26, 2021 l\o 01/25/2021 re Notice of Removal (Attorney Civil Case Opening),,, I , Complaint - (Discovery), Joint STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Responsive Pleading and Motion to Remand filed by Defendants Jimmie Garrett Baker, Michael J Bellas, Mitchell C Lipkin, Bianca Newbatt, Kenneth Newbatt, UCOMMG, LLC, Unified Communications Group, Inc., Westele Utility Solutions, LLC. (Attachments: # I Proposed Order Proposed Order - Joint Stip to Extend Time to Respond to Complaint adn File Motion to Remand)(Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 01/25/2021) 01/26/2021 10 ORDER REGARDING JOINT STIPULATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR DEFENDANTS TO RESPOND TO THE INITIAL COMPLAINT TO MARCH 26, 2021 AND FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE A MOTION TO REMAND TO APRIL 4, 2021 9 , by Judge Otis D. Wright, ll (1c) Modified on 1/26/2021 (lc). (Entered: 01/26/2021) 03/26/2021 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff Butler America, LLC ’s Complaint Against Defs UCOMMG, LLC, Unified Communications Group, Ina, Kenneth NeWbatt, Bianca Newbatt, Mitchell Lipkin, Michael Bellas, and WesTele Utility Solutions, LLC, NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case pusruant to Rule 12(b)(6) filed by Defendants Mitchell C Lipkin, Unified Communications Group, Inc., Michael J Bellas, Westele Utility Solutions, LLC, UCOMMG, LLC, Kenneth Newbatt, Bianca Newbatt. Motion set for hearing on 4/26/2021 at 01:30 PM before Judge Otis D. Wright II.(Attachments: # I Memorandum MPA ISO Defendants Mtn to Dismiss, # 2 Declaration Dec of Shayna Balch ISO Defendants Mtn to Dismiss, # i Declaration Dec of M Bellas ISO Defendants Mtn to Dismiss, # fl Declaration Dec of B 4of8 8/3/2021, 1:16 PM CM/ECF - California Central District https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?145342623614723-L_1_0-1 Newbatt ISO Defendants Mtn to Dismiss, # é Declaration Dec of K Newbatt ISO Defendants Mtn to Dismiss, # é Declaration Dec of M Lipkin ISO Defendants Mtn to Dismiss, # Z Proposed Order Proposed Order re Defendants Mtn to Dismiss) (Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 03/26/2021) 03/26/2021 12 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Compel Arbitration filed by Defendant Jimmie Garrett Baker. Motion set for hearing on 4/26/2021 at 01:30 PM before Judge Otis D. Wright II.(Attachments: # I Memorandum MPA ISO Defendant's MTC Arbitration, # 2 Declaration Dec of Shayna Balch ISO Defendant's MTC Arbitration, # 3 Exhibit EX A to Dec of Shayna Balch ISO Defendant's MTC Arbitration, # fl Proposed-Order Proposed Order Re ISO Defendant's MTC Arbitration) (Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 03/26/2021) 04/05/2021 13 Opposition re: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Compel Arbitration Q re Defendant Jimmie Garrett Baker, Jr’s filed by Plaintiff Butler America, LLC. (Totten, Cameron) (Entered: 04/05/2021) 04/ 07/2021 _14 NOTICE OF NON-OPPOSITION to NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Plaintiff Butler America, LLC ’s Corhplaint Against Defs UCOMMG, LLC, Unified Communications Group, Inc.,Kenneth Newbatt, Bianca Newbatt, Mitchell Lipkin, Michael Bellas, and WesTele Utility Solutions, NOTICE 0F MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case pusruant to Rule 12(b) (6) fl filed by Defendants Michael J Bellas, Mitchell C Lipkin, Bianca Newbatt, Kenneth Newbatt, UCOMMG, LLC, Unified Communications Group, Inc., Westele Utility Solutions, LLC. (Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 04/07/2021) 04/12/2021 15 REPLY Support NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Compel Arbitration Q filed by Defendant Jimmie Garrett Baker. (Evans, Kathryn) (Entered: 04/ 12/2021) 04/1 6/2021 16 First AMENDED COMPLAINT All Defendants amending Complaint - (Discovery), filed by Plaintiff Butler America, LLC (Attachments: # l Exhibit)(Totten, Cameron) (Entered: 04/16/2021) 04/19/2021 17 The hearing on the MOTION to Compel Arbitration Q , scheduled for April 26, 2021 at 1:30 P.M., is hereby VACATED and taken off calendar. No appearances are necessary. The matter stands submitted, and will be decided upon without oral argument. An'order will issue.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (sce) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 04/ 19/2021) 04/19/2021 18 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT fl by Judge Otis D. Wright, II : On April 16, 2021 Plaintiff filed amended complaint. As the pending motion to dismiss was based on a complaint that is no longer operative, the motion is DENIED as MOOT. (1c) (Entered: 04/ 19/2021) 04/20/2021 19 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: First Amended Complaint/Petition E . The following error(s) was/were found: Caption of document is incomplete/incorrect. FRCP 10 requires all parties be named on the caption. Filer has "et als" in defendant area. Clerk attempted to search pleading for named defendants Body text named Cynthia Baker and Does 1-50 not on caption, but has stopped searching for anymore parties not named on the caption and leaves filer to ascertain his named defendants as appropriate. In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document tobe filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (1c) (Entered: 50f8 8/3/2021, 1:16 PM CM/ECF - California Central District https://ecf.cacd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/DktRpt.pl?145342623614723-L_1_0-1 04/20/2021) 04/3 0/2021 20 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Defendants Mitchell C Lipkin, Unified Communications Group, Inc., Michael J Bellas, Westele Utility Solutions, LLC, UCOMMG, LLC, Kenneth Newbatt, Bianca Newbatt , NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) filed by Defendants Mitchell C Lipkin, Unified Communications Group, Inc., Michael J Bellas, Westele Utility Solutions, LLC, UCOMMG, LLC, Kenneth Newbatt, Bianca Newbatt. Motion set for hearing on 6/7/2021 at 01 :30 PM before Judge Otis D. Wright II. (Attachments: # l Memorandum MPA ISO Defendants Mtn to Dismiss, # 2 Declaration DEC of Kenneth