Motion for Summary Adjudication in IN RE: MOBILEONE WAGE AND HOUR CASES| Trellis.Law

On May 22, 2019 a Motion,Ex Parte was filed involving a dispute between Chess, Kiki, Ly, Vivian, and Mobileone, Llc, An Arizona Limited Liability Company, for Complex Civil Unlimited in the District Court of San Mateo County.

Preview
Electrunlully

brﬁuplnur Cour! ﬂﬁaliﬂnllﬂaunﬁl nFS-m Malia

UH 10/22/201 9
GREGG A. FISCH, Bar No. 214486
gﬁsch@she,ppardmullin.com
Cal.
m_munmﬂﬁggun— Dam:
[\J
Y. DOUGLAS YANG, Cal. Bar No. 307550
dyang@sheppardmullin.com
MICHAELA GOLDSTEIN, Cal. Bar No. 3 1 6455
mgoldstein@sheppardmullin.com
1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1600
Los Angeles, California 90067-6055
Telephone: 3 10.228.3700
Facsimile: 3 10.228.3701
\DOO\JO\Ul-§U.)

Attorneys for Defendant
MOBILEONE, LLC

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
10
COMPLEX CIVIL LITIGATION
11
In re MOBILEONE WAGE AND HOUR. Judicial Council Coordination Proceedings
12 CASES, No. JCCP 5039

13 Coordinated Proceeding Special Title (CRC Assigned For'All Purposes To
Rule 3.550) The Honorable Marie S. Weiner, Department 2
14
SEPARATE STATEMENT 0F
15 UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN
SUPPORT 0F DEFENDANT
16 MOBILEONE LLC’S MOTION FOR
c.c.P. § 437cm SUMMARY
17 ADJUDICATION 0F LEGAL ISSUES
'

18 [Filed concurrently with Notice 0f
Defendant’s Motion; Memorandum ofPoints
19 and Authorities; Appendix ovaidence; and
[Proposed] Order]
20
Hearing date: December 1'6, .2019

21 Time: 10:00 a.m. -

Location: 400 County Center
‘22 Redwood City, CA 94063, Department 2.

23 Consolidated Complaint Filed: Sept. 6, 201 9
Kikz' Chess Complaint Filed: May 30, 2018
24 _
Vivian Ly Complaint Filed: October 19, 201 8

:26

28'

-1-
SMRHI4844-4 l 02-28 89.2 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF
.DEFENDANT’S MSA
In accordance with Code of Civil Procedure section 4370(t) and California Rules of Court,

Rule 3.1350, Defendant MobileOne LLC (“MobileOne”) hereby submits this Separate Statement

of Undisputed Material Facts, together with references to supporting evidence, in support of its

Motion for Sumrmry Adjudication.

Egg}; The court-approved settlement in the class action lawsuit, entitled Matthew
\loxmb

Maurice Cannon, et al., v.MobileOne LLC, Case No. 34-2015-00179159-CU-OE-GDS,

Sacramento Superior Court of Cal’ifomia (ﬁled on May 13, 2015), (hereafter referenced as

“Cannon”), releases, precludes, and/or bars Plaintiffs’ ﬁrst cause of action for failure to provide

meal periods, insomuch as that claim concerns putative class members in the instant coordinated

10 action who were Cannon Class Members and that relate to any such claims that run through

11. July 5, 2016 (the “Release Period”).

13 Fact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting No ResponsevNeeded
14 Evidence

1'5 1. A lawsuit entitled Matthew Maurice Cannon, et al., v. Undisputed. The Parties’

16 M0bile0ne LLC (hereafter referenced as “Cannon”? was filed 0n stipulated t0 this Fact

17 May 13, 2015, in the Sacramento Superior Court 0f California, pursuant to the Joint

18 assigned Case No. 34—2015-00'1 791 59-CU—OE-GDS and Stipulation concurrently

19 assigned to Judge David Brown. ﬁled with the Court on

20 See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact. No. 1).. October 22, 2019.
I

21 2. On February 3’,201 6, the First Amended Complaint, which was Undisputed. The Parties’

22 the operative complaint, in Cannon was ﬁled. stipulated to this Fact

23 See. Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact No. 2). pursuant to the Joint

24 Stipulation concurrently

25 ﬁled with the Court on

26 October 22, '20 19.

-2-
SMRHI4344-4102-2889-2 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS ISO MSA
Fact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting No Response Needed
[\.)
Evidence

AU.)
3. Cannon was settled on a class-wide basis. Undisputed. The Parties’

See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact No. 3). stipulated to this Fact

pursuant t0 the Joint

Stipulation concurrently

\DOONQU} ﬁled with the Court on

October 22, 2019.

4. The Court approved the class-wide settlement in Cannon. Undisputed. The Parties’

10 See Parties’ Stipulation 0f Facts (Fact No. 4). stipulated to this Fact

11 pursuant to the Joint

12 Stipulation, concurrently

13 ﬁled With the Court on

14 October 22, 2019.

15 5. In the Court’s Order, granting ﬁnal approval ofthe class Undisputed. The Parties’

16 settlement in Cannon, thé class was deﬁned as follows: “all .non— stipulated to this Fact

17 exempt employees employed by MobileOne at any time from pursuant to the Joint

18 May 13, 201 1, to July 3 1 , .2015, who worked for Defendant Stipulation concurrently

19 within the State 0f California.” Each such individual within that ﬁled with the Court on

20 class deﬁnition was considered a “Class Member.” October 22, 201 9.

21 See Parties.’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact No. 5).

22 6. The settlement agreement in Cannon, as approvedby the Court, Undisputed. The Paﬁies’

23 stated that the settlement would constitute a “full and complete stipulated to this Fact

24 settlement and release 0f all claims described in.Paragraph 24 of pursuant to the Joint

25 this Stipulation 0f Settlement.” Stipulation concurrently

26 See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact No. 6). ﬁled with the Court 0n

27 October 22, 2019.

-3-
SMRH:484.4-4 102-28892 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS ISO MSA
Fact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting No Response Needed

Evidence

7. In Paragraph 24 of the Cannon Settlement Agreement, the Class Undisputed. The Parties’

Members released the following claims: “any and allclaims stipulated t0 this Fact

asserted in the Complaint and any other claims that arise out of pursuant to the Joint

the same underlying factual allegations of'the. Complaint that Stipulation concurrently
um

occurred during the Class Period, including claims for alleged ﬁled with the Court on

(1) failure to pay all wages and overtime earned; (2) failure to October 22, 2019.

provide meal periods; (3) failure to provide rest breaks; (4)

10 failure to provide adequate seating; (5) failure to provide

1.1 accurate itemized wage statements in violation of Labor Code
I

12 ‘
section 226; ('6) failure t0»timely pay wages when due in

13 violation of Labor Code sections 201, 202 and 203; (7) unfair

14 competition Violation of Section
i-n. 17200 of California’s

15 Business and Professions Code; and (8) civil penalties under the

16 Private Attorneys’ General Act of 2004 (PAGA), Labor Code

17 sections 2698, et seq.”

18 See Parties’ Stipulation 0f Facts (Fact No. 7).

19 8. Paragraph 24 of the Cannon Settlement Agreement further Undisputed. The Parties’

20 established that the following claims also were released by the stipulated to this Fact

21 Class Members: “all claims for unpaid wages, including, but not pursuant to the Joint

22 limited t0, straight time compensation, overtime compensation, Stipulation concurrently

23 and interest; missed meal period andrest-period wages; payment ﬁled with the Court on

24 for all hours worked; wage statements; failure to keep accurate October 22, 2019.

25 records; failure to provide adequate seating; unfair business

26 practices; penalties, including, but not limitedto, recordkeeping

27 penalties, wage statement penalties, minimum-wage penalties,

-4- ,

SMRHz43444102-28892 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL F ACTS ISO MSA
Fact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting N0 Response Needed.

Evidence

and wa’iting-time penalties; and attorneys.’ fees and costs. The

Class Released Claims include all such claims arising under the

California Labor Code (including, but not limited to, sections

OOQONUI-b

201, 202, 203, .204, 210, 218.6, 221, 225.5, 226, 226.7, 227.3,

450, 510, 51 1, 512, 558, 1174, 1174.5, 1194, 1197, 1197.1,

1197.2, 1198, and 2698, et seq.); the Wage Orders ofthe

\O
California Industrial Welfare: Commission; California Business.

10 and Professions Code section 17200, et seq_.; 'the California

11 common law of contract; the Fair Labor Standards. Act, 2.9

12 U.S.C. § 201, et seq.; and federal common law.”
13 See Parties’ Stipulation 0f Facts (Fact No. 8).

14' 9. Motion for Preliminary Approval 0f Class Settlement in Cannon Undisputed. The Parties’

15 was ﬁled on February 16, 20 1 6. stipulated t0 this Fact

16 See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact. N0. 9). pursuant to the Joint

17 Stipulation concurrently

18 ﬁled with the Court on

19 October 22, 2019.

20 10. On March 14, 2016, the Court granted preliminary appro§a1 0f Undisputed. The Parties’

21 the Class Settlement in Cannon, as well as granted conditional stipulated to this Fact

22 certiﬁcation of the class, approved the form and method of class pursuant to the Joint

23 notice, and scheduled. ﬁnal approval of the Class Settlemént. Stipulation concurrently

2'4
See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (FactNo. 10). ﬁled with the Court on

25 October 22, 2019.

26. 11. As part of the ruling towards the grant ofpreliminary approval ofUndisputed. The Parties”

27 the Class Settlement in Cannon, the Court held that it “ﬁnds that stipulated to this Fact

-5-
SMRHI4844—4102-28892 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UND‘ISPUTE‘D MATERIAL FACTS ISO MSA
Egg; Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supgorting No Response Needed

Evidence

the procedures for notifying the Class about the settlement as pursuant to the Joint
M-PWN

described inthe Stipulation provide the best notice practicable Stipulation concurrently

under the circumstances and therefore meet the requirements of ﬁled with the Court on

due process, and directs, the mailing of the. Class Notice iﬁ October‘22, 2019.

accordance With the Settlement Agreemen .”
And, the Court

\OOOQG

also “approve[d], as to form and content, the proposed Class

Notice, attached to the Settlement Agreement as Exhibit A.”

10 See Parties’ Stipulation 0f Facts (Fact No. 11)..

11 12. Motion for Final Approval 0f Class Settlement in Cannon was Undisputed. The Parties’

12 ﬁled on May 23, 2016. stipulated to this Fact

13 See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact No. 12). pursuant to the Joint,
I

14 Stipulation concurrently

15 ﬁled with the Court on

16 October 22, 2019.

17 13. The Parties in Cannon participated in a Hearing regarding Final Undisputed. The Parties’
1'8
Approval 0f Class Settlement onJune 15, .201 6. stipulated to this Fact

'19
See Parties’ Stipulation 0f Facts (Fact N0. 13). pursuant t0 the Joint
I

20 Stipulation concurrently

21 ﬁled With the Court on

22 October 22, 2019.

23 14. On June .15,2016, the Court entered a.Minute Order Granting Undisputed. The Paﬁies’

24 Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement in .
stipulated t0 this Fact

25 Cannon. In the Minute Order, the Court held that “Class pursuant t0 the Joint

26'
Members were sent the Notice of Pendency of Class Action, Stipulation concurrently

27 Proposed Settlement, Your Rights, and Options for You ‘tQ
28

-6- .

SMRH14344‘4102-2839-2 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDI’SPUTED MATERIAL FACTS ISO MSA
Fact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting N0 Response Needed

Evidence

Consider ("Class Notice") Via U.S. Mail, which explained the ﬁled with the Court on

terms of the proposed. Settlement and appraised Class Members October 22, 201 9.

of their rights under the Settlement.”

§§g Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact No. 14).

15. The Court granted ﬁnal approval 0f the Class Settlement on Undisputed. The Parties’
I

\OOOQQ

July 5, 20-16. stipulated to this Fact

See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact N0. 1.5). pursuant to the Joint

10 Stipulation concurrently

11 ﬁled with the Court on

12 October 22, 2019.

13 16. On July 5, 2016, Judge Brown signed the Order and Judgment Undisputed. The Parties’

14 Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement in Cannon. stipulated to this Fact

15 See Parties’ Stipulation 0f Facts (FactNo. >16). pursuant to the Joint

16 Stipulation concurrently

17 ﬁled with the Court on

18 October 22, .201 9.

19 _
17. The Court found that “the class members were given notice of Undisputed. The Parties’
20' their rights under the Settlement in a reasonable manner that stipulated to this Fact

21 comports with. the requirements ofvdue process.” The Court also pursuant to the Joint

22 explained “[n]o member of the Class ﬁled written. obj actions to Stipulation concurrently

23 the Settlement.” ﬁled with the ”Court on

24 See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact No. 17). October 22V, 201 9.

25 18. As the Court explained in the Minute Order, “not a single Class Undisputed. The Parties’
2-6
Member opted out.” stipulated t0 this Fact

27 See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact N0. 18). pursuant to ’the Joint

-7-
SMRHt4844-4102-28892 SEPARATE STATEMENT O_F UNDISPUTE‘D MATERIAL FACTS ISO MSA
Eact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting No Response Needed

Evidence

Stipulation concurrehtly
{PWN

ﬁled with the Court on

October 22, 2019.

uoﬁm
19. The Court dismissed Cannon “on the merits With prejudice.” Undisputed. The Parties’

Further, the Couft held that, “[u]pon entry 0f [the] Judgment and stipulated to this Fact

the release of the Settlement proceeds to the claims administrator pursuant to the Joint

in [the] case, Plaintiffs and the Class shall be deemed to have Stipulation concurrently

10 I'ﬁled
fully and ﬁnally released allclaims atissue in this.lawsuit as set with the Court on

11 forth in the, Settlement Agreement.” October 22, 2019.

12 See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact N0. 19).

13 20. In Cannon, Defendants released the Settlement proceeds to the Undisputed. The Parties’

14 claims administrator in the case on July 5, 2016, and the claims stipulated to this Fact

15. administrator disbursed the Settlement funds to the Settlement pursuant t0 the Joint

'16
Class Members 0n July 8, 2016. Stipulation concurrently

17 See Parties’ Stipulation. of Facts (Fact No. 20). ﬁled With the Court on

18 October 22, 2019.

19 21. The Cannon Settiement'Agreement states that all claims ére Undisputed. The Parties’

20 released “as of the date of the. Judgment” i.e.,July 5, 201 6. stipulated t0 this Fact

21 Similarly, the Notice to Class Members, attached as Exhibit A to pursuant to the Joint,

22 the Cannon Settlement Agreement explains that the releaSe Stipulation concurrently

23 applies “through the date of‘ﬁnal approval of the settlement.” ﬁled withthe Court on

24 See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact No. 21). October 22, 2019.

25 22. There were 877 Class Members in Cannon, all of whom were Undisputed. The Parties’

26 subj ect to the terms of the Cannon Settlement Agreement and stipulated to this.Fact

27 reléased claims against MobileOne as a result. pursuant to the Joint

-3-
SMRH14844-4 102-28892 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTE‘D MATERIAL FACTS ISO MSA
Fact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting N0 Response Needed

Evidence-

See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact No. 22). Stipulation concurrently

ﬁled wi'th‘the Court on

October 22, 2019.

ON
23. Plaintiff Chess was hired in a Retail Staff positiOn, classiﬁed as aUndisputed. The .Parties’

N non—exempt employee, on March 23, 2015. Effective, on or stipulated to this Fact-

‘

00
around June 1,2016, Plaintiff Chess was promoted to an pursuant to the Joint

KO
Assistant Manager position, classiﬁed as an exempt employee. Stipulation concurrently

10 Then, on or around May 2, .2017, Plaintiff Chess was promoted ﬁled with the Court on-

11 to a Location Manager position, again classiﬁed as an exempt October 22, 2019.

12 employee. Plaintiff Chess’s employment with MobileOne ended

13 as ofJune 1, 2017.

14 See Parties” Stipulation of Facts (Fact No. 23).

15 24. On April 4, 20 1,6, Plaintiff Kiki Chess was provided notice of the Undisputed. The Parties”

16 Cannon class action settlement to her last known address. stipulated t6 this Fact

17 Because she did not submit a Claim Form by April 29, 2016, pursuant to the Joint

18 Plaintiff Chess also was sent a reminder postcard, which was Stipulation concurrently

19 mailed out on May 4, 2016. Plaintiff Chess never responded to ﬁled with the Court on

20 the mailings; she did not submit a Claim Form, an Objection, a October 22, 2019.

2-1
Request for Exclusion, or any other documents in 'reSponse.

22 See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact No. 24).

23 25. Pursuant to the Setﬂement Agreement, “Class Members [in Undisputed. The Parties’

24 Cannon] who do not ‘Opt out’ shall be deemed a party to the stipulated to this Fact

25 Settlement, Characterized as a Settlement. Class. Member, and pursuant to the Joint

26 have agreed to arelease of all claims of the Settlement Class Stipulation concurrently
‘

27 against MobileOne.”

-9-
3MRH14344-4102-2889-2 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS ISO MSA
Fact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting No Response Needed

Evidence

See Parties’ Stipulation 0f Facts (Fact No. 25). ﬁled with the Court on
Ul-bUJN

October 22, 2019.

26. Plaintiff Kiki Chess did not submit a timely and valid Request Undisputed. The Parties"

for Exclusion and, thus, was a Settlement Class Member in stipulated to this Fact
~

Cannon. pursuant t0 the Joint
\OOOQON

See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact No. 26). Stipulation concurrently

ﬁled With the Court on

10 October 22, 20 1 9.

11 27. Plaintiff Ly was hired by MobileOne in a Retail Staff position, Undisputed. The Parties’

12 and classiﬁed as a non—exempt employee, effective June 20, stipulated to this Fact

'13
2017. Plaintiff Ly continued in the same position until hér pursuant to the Joint

14 employment with MobileOne ended as.of February ‘5,201 8'. Stipulation concurrently

15 During her MobileOne employment, Plaintiff Ly held only that ﬁled with the Court on

16 one non—exempt position, she never served in a management role October 22, 20 1 9.

17 or held an Assistant Manager or Location Manager positioh.

1.8 See Parties’ Stipulation of Facts (Fact No. 27).

19 28. Because of the timing of When she was employed with UndiSputéd. The Parties’

20 MobileOne, Plaintiff Ly was not covered by Cannon or the stipulated to this Fact

21 settlement in Cannon. And, thus, Plaintiff Ly was not a Class pursuant to the Joint

22 Member in Cannon and did not release any claim; against Stipulation concurrently

23 MobileOne as aresult. ﬁled with. the Court 0n

24 See. Parties’ Stipulation 0f Facts (Fact No. 28). October 22, 2019.

-1 0-
SMRHI4844-4102-2839-2 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS ISO MSA
Issue 2: The Cannon Settlement releases, precludes, and/or bars Plaintiffs’ second

cause of action for failure to provide rest periods, insomuch as that claim concerns putative class

members in the instant coordinated action Who were Cannon Class Members and that relate to any

such claims during: the Release Period.

Fact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting No Response Needed

Evidence
I

29. MobileOne incorporates Undisputed Facts 1-28. Undisputed. The Parties”

(MobileOne incorporates the evidence cited in support of stipulated to these Facts

10 UndiSputed Facts '1—"2-8). pursuant to the Joint

11 Stipulation concurrently

12 ﬁled With the Court on

13 October 22, 2019.

15 l_s_§_1_1_e__3__: The Cannon Settlement releases, precludés, and/or bars Plaintiffs’ third

16 cause ofzaction for failure to pay hourly wages, insomuch as that claim concerns putative class

17 members in the instant coordinated action who were Cannon Class Members and that relate to any

18 such claims during the Release Period.

20 Fact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting No Response‘Needed
21 Evidence

22 30. MobileOne incorporates Undisputed Facts 1-28; Undisputed. The Parties’

23 (MobileOne incorporates the evidence cited in support of stipulated to these Facts

24 Undisputed Facts 1-28). pursuant to the Joint

25 Stipulation concurrently

26 ﬁled with the Court on

27 October 22, 20 1 9.

28'

-11-
SMRH:4844—4102-2889.2 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UND‘ISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS ISO MSA
H Issue 4: The Cannon Settlement releases, precludes, and/or bars P1aintiffs-’ fourth

[\J
cause of action for failure to pay vacation wages, insomuch as that. claim concerns putative class

UL)
members in the instant coordinated action Who were Cannon Class Members and that relate to any

-P such claims during the Release Period.

ON
Fact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts: and Supporting Plaintiffs’ Response
ﬂ'
Evidence

00
31. MobileOne incorporates Undisputed Facts 1-28.. Undisputed. The Parties’

\O
(MobileOne incOrporates the evidence cited in support of stipulated to these Facts

Undisputed Facts 1-28). pursuant to the Joint

Stipulation concurrently

ﬁled With the Court on

October 22, 2019.

Issue 5: The Cannon Settlement releases, precludes, and/or bars Plaintiffs’ ﬁfth

cause of action for failure to pay sick time, insomuch as that claim concerns putative class

members in.the instant coordinated action Who were Cannon Class Members and that relate t0 any

such claims during the Release Period.

Fact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting Plaintiffs’ Response

Evidence

32. MobileOne incorporates Undisputed Facts 1-28. Undisputed. The Parties’

(MobileOne incorporates the evidence cited in support of stipulated to these Facts

Undisputed Facts 1-28). pursuant to the Joint

Stipulation concurrently

ﬁled with the Court on

October 22, 20 1 9.

-12-
SMRH24 844-421 02-28 89.2 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED-IMATERIAL FACTS ISO MSA
Issue 6: The Cannon Settlement releases, precludes, and/or bars Plaintiffs’ sixth

cause of action for failure to indemnify, insomuch as that.claim concerns putative class members

in the instant coordinated action who were Cannon Class Members and that relate to any such
m—kmw

claims during the Release Period.

Fact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting Plaintiffs’ Response

Evidence
\OOONQ

33. MobileOne incorporates Undisputed Facts 1-28. Undisputed. The Parties’

(MobileOne incorporates the evidence cited in support of stipulated to these Facts

10 Undisputed Facts 1-28). pursuant to the Joint

11 Stipulation concurrently

12 ﬁled With the Court 0n

13 October 22, 2019.

1-4

15 Issue 7: The Cannon Settlement releases, precludes, and/or bars Plaintiffs’ seventh

16 cause of action for failure to provide accurate written wage statements, insomuch as that claim

17 concerns putative class members in the instant coordinated action who were Cannon Class

'18
Members and that relate to any such claims during the Release Period.

19'
..

20 Fact .
Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting Plaintiffs’ Response

21 Evidence

22 34. MobiIeOne incorporates Undisputed Facts 1—28. Undisputed. The Parties’

23 (NIobileOne incorporates the evidence cited in support 0f stipulated t0 these Facts

24 Undisputed Facts 1-28). pursuant to the Joint

25 Stipulation concurrently

26'
ﬁled with the Court on

27 October 22, 20 1 9.

-13-
SMRHI4844-4102‘28892 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS ISO MSA
Issue ,8: The Cannon Settlement releases, precludes, and/or bars Plaintiffs’ eighth

cause of action for failure to timely pay ﬁnal wages, insomuch as that claim concerns putative

class members in the instant coordinated action who were Cannon Class Members and that relate

to any such claims during the Release Period.

Fact Defendants’ Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting Plaintiffs’ Response

Evidence
\OOOQQ

MobileOne incorporates Undisputed Facts 1-28. Undisputed. The Parties’

(MobileOne incorporates the evidence cited in support of stipulated to these Facts.

Case Info

Judge

Weiner, Marie S. Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

October 22, 2019

Case Filing Date

May 22, 2019

County

Parties

CHESS, KIKI Plaintiff
LY, VIVIAN Plaintiff
MOBILEONE, LLC, AN ARIZONA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Defendant
SETAREH, CHAIM S. Attorney for the Plaintiff
YEREMIAN, DAVID Attorney for the Plaintiff
William Pao Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Gregg Fisch Attorneys for Defendants
Yongqing Yang Attorneys for Defendants
Michaela Goldstein Attorneys for Defendants
Alexandra McIntosh Attorney
Roman Shkodnik Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Tracy Warren Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Kathryn Fox Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Walter Haines Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Michael Campbell Attorneys for Defendants
Nolan Dilts Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Alicia Kennon Attorneys for Defendants
Y. Yang Attorneys for Defendants
RICK WALTMAN Attorneys for Defendants
David Mcdonough Attorney
Louis Mok Attorney

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

Motion,Ex Parte: IN RE: MOBILEONE WAGE AND HOUR CASES

Preview

Related Topics

Case Info

Parties