Preview
1 BUCHALTER
A Professional Corporation
2 TRACY A. WARREN (SBN: 228013) 6/16/2020
KATHRYN B. FOX (SBN: 279705)
3 RICK A. WALTMAN (SBN: 306463)
655 West Broadway, Suite 1625
4 San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: 619.219.5335
5 Email: twarren@buchalter.com
6 Attorneys for Defendant
MOBILE ONE, LLC
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
10 UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
11 In re MOBILEONE WAGE AND CASE NO. JCCP 5039
HOUR CASES, Assigned to Honorable Marie S. Weiner
12 Department: 2
Coordination Proceeding
13 Special Title (CRC Rule. 3.550) DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S
ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST
14 AMENDED CONSOLIDATED
COMPLAINT
15 Included Actions:
16 Kiki Chess vs. MobileOne LLC
17 San Mateo County Superior Court
Case No. 18 CIV 02731
18
Vivian Ly vs. MobileOne LLC
19 Sacramento Superior Court
Case No. 34-2018-00243020
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
BUCHALTER
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
SAN DIEGO
1
DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER
TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
1 Defendant MobileOne LLC (“Defendant”) hereby answers the unverified First Amended
2 Consolidated Complaint of Plaintiffs Kiki Chess and Vivian Ly (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), as
3 follows:
4 GENERAL DENIAL
5 Pursuant to the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure section 431.30, Defendant
6 denies, generally and specifically, each and every allegation, statement, and matter, and each
7 purported cause of action contained in Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Complaint, and,
8 without limiting the generality of the foregoing, denies generally and specifically that Plaintiffs
9 have been damaged in any way at all by reason of any acts or omissions of Defendant.
10 ADDITIONAL DEFENSES
11 In further answer to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Complaint, Defendant alleges
12 the following additional defenses. In asserting these defenses, Defendant does not assume the
13 burden of proof as to matters that, pursuant to law, are Plaintiffs’ burden to prove.
14 FIRST DEFENSE
15 (Failure to State a Cause of Action)
16 1. As to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Complaint, or any purported cause of
17 action therein alleged, Plaintiffs fail to state facts sufficient to constitute claims upon which relief
18 can be granted against Defendant.
19 SECOND DEFENSE
20 (Statute of Limitations)
21 2. Plaintiffs’ purported causes of action are barred, in whole or in part, to the extent
22 Plaintiffs seek relief for any purported claims that were not brought before the expiration of the
23 applicable statute(s) of limitations.
24 THIRD DEFENSE
25 (Estoppel)
26 3. Plaintiffs, by their conduct, are estopped to assert any cause of action against
27 Defendant.
28 ///
BUCHALTER
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
SAN DIEGO
2
DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER
TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
1 FOURTH DEFENSE
2 (Waiver)
3 4. Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Complaint, and each and every cause of
4 action alleged therein, is barred by the doctrine of waiver.
5 FIFTH DEFENSE
6 (Unclean Hands)
7 5. Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Complaint, and each and every cause of
8 action alleged therein, is barred by the doctrine of unclean hands.
9 SIXTH DEFENSE
10 (Release)
11 6. The claims of Plaintiffs and putative class members are barred to the extent they
12 executed a release of claims or were a class member in a settlement class that extinguished their
13 claims, in whole or in part.
14 SEVENTH DEFENSE
15 (Excessive Penalties Unconstitutional)
16 7. The penalties claimed by Plaintiffs in this case are excessive and thus violate
17 Defendant’s rights under the state and federal Constitutions.
18 EIGHTH DEFENSE
19 (No Willful Violation of Labor Code Section 203)
20 8. Plaintiffs’ claims for Labor Code section 203 penalties fail because Defendant did
21 not willfully fail to comply with the requirements of the California Labor Code, including, without
22 limitation, sections 201 and 202.
23 NINTH DEFENSE
24 (Good Faith Dispute)
25 9. Neither Plaintiffs nor the putative class members are entitled to Labor Code section
26 203 penalties because a good faith dispute exists as to the monies allegedly owed at the time of the
27 termination of employment, such that Defendant cannot be held to have willfully failed to comply
28 with the requirements of the applicable Labor Code sections.
BUCHALTER
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
SAN DIEGO
3
DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER
TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
1 TENTH DEFENSE
2 (Meal Periods Provided)
3 10. Plaintiffs’ claims for penalties and damages arising out of alleged meal period
4 violations are barred because Defendant provided the opportunity to Plaintiffs and the putative class
5 members to take timely meal breaks, and Defendant is not liable for unpaid wages, damages, or
6 penalties, or otherwise responsible, when Plaintiffs or putative class members voluntarily elect not
7 to use the meal period opportunities provided to them.
8 ELEVENTH DEFENSE
9 (Rest Breaks Authorized and Permitted)
10 11. Plaintiffs’ claims for penalties and damages arising out of alleged rest break
11 violations are barred because Defendant provided the opportunity to, and authorized and permitted,
12 Plaintiffs and the putative class members to take timely rest breaks, and Defendant is not liable for
13 unpaid wages, damages, or penalties, or otherwise responsible, when Plaintiffs or putative class
14 members voluntarily elect not to use the rest break opportunities provided to them.
15 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
16 (No Suffering or Permitting to Work)
17 12. Plaintiffs’ claims for unpaid wages are barred to the extent that they performed work
18 without notifying Defendant and Defendant was not otherwise aware the work was being done.
19 THIRTEENTH DEFENSE
20 (Set Off)
21 13. To the extent that Plaintiffs and/or putative class members are entitled to damages
22 or penalties, Defendant is entitled to an offset for any overpayments of wages or other consideration
23 previously provided to those parties.
24 FOURTEENTH DEFENSE
25 (Non-Certifiable Class)
26 14. As to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Complaint, or any purported cause of
27 action therein alleged, Plaintiffs fail to state facts, and are unable to state facts, sufficient to certify
28 a class and this action is not properly brought as a class or collective action.
BUCHALTER
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
SAN DIEGO
4
DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER
TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
1 FIFTEENTH DEFENSE
2 (Inadequate Representative)
3 15. Plaintiffs, and each of them, fail to serve as an adequate representative of any class
4 that they seek to represent in this action.
5 SIXTEENTH DEFENSE
6 (De Minimis)
7 16. Any time that Plaintiffs or the putative class members worked for which they were
8 not compensated, if any, was de minimis and therefore not compensable.
9 SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
10 (No Section 17200 Standing)
11 17. Plaintiffs’ claims under Business & Professions Code section 17200, et seq., are
12 barred to the extent that Plaintiffs lack standing to sue pursuant to Business & Professions Code
13 sections 12703 and 12704.
14 EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
15 (No Recovery Under UCL)
16 18. Plaintiffs improperly seek through their cause of action under Business &
17 Professions Code section 17200 (the “UCL”) to recover monies that are not recoverable under the
18 UCL.
19 NINETEENTH DEFENSE
20 (Exemption)
21 19. Each and every cause of action alleged in Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated
22 Complaint that pertains to Plaintiff Kiki Chess and all other exempt employees fails as a matter of
23 law because Plaintiff Kiki Chess and those other exempt employees were properly classified as
24 exempt employees.
25 ///
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
BUCHALTER
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
SAN DIEGO
5
DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER
TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
1 TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
2 (Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies)
3 20. To the extent Plaintiffs have failed to meet the prerequisites to bringing suit under
4 the Private Attorney General Act of 2004, Cal. Lab. Code section 2698, et seq., their claims are
5 barred.
6 TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
7 (Accord and Satisfaction)
8 21. Defendant alleges that Plaintiffs’ purported causes of action as set forth in Plaintiffs’
9 First Amended Consolidated Complaint and the claims of some or all of the purported class
10 members are barred, in whole or in part, by the principles of accord and satisfaction, and payment.
11 TWENTY-SECOND DEFENSE
12 (Arbitration)
13 22. Plaintiffs are barred from representing each and every putative class member who
14 agreed to arbitrate any or all of the purported claims alleged in the First Amended Consolidated
15 Complaint.
16 TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
17 (Reservation of Defenses)
18 23. Defendant has insufficient knowledge or information on which to form a belief as
19 to whether they may have additional, as yet unstated, affirmative defenses available. Defendant
20 therefore reserves the right to assert additional affirmative defenses in the event discovery indicates
21 that they may be appropriate.
22
23 WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for judgment as follows:
24 1. That Plaintiffs take nothing by their unverified First Amended Consolidated Complaint;
25 2. That judgment be entered in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiffs on all causes of
26 action;
27 3. That Defendant be awarded reasonable attorneys’ fees according to proof, as applicable;
28 4. That Defendant be awarded the costs of suit incurred herein; and
BUCHALTER
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
SAN DIEGO
6
DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER
TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
1 5. That Defendant be awarded such other and further relief as the Court may deem
2 appropriate and proper.
3
DATED: June 16, 2020 BUCHALTER
4 A Professional Corporation
5
6 By:
TRACY A. WARREN
7 KATHRYN B. FOX
RICK A. WALTMAN
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
BUCHALTER
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
SAN DIEGO
7
DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER
TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
2 I am employed in the County of San Diego, State of California. I am over the age of 18
and not a party to the within action. My business address is at BUCHALTER, A Professional
3 Corporation, 655 West Broadway, Suite 1625, San Diego, CA 92101.
4 On the date set forth below, I served the foregoing document described as:
5 1. DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’
FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
6
on all other parties and/or their attorney(s) of record to this action by ☒ emailing and/or
7 ☐ placing a true copy thereof in a sealed envelope as follows:
8 Shaun Setareh Alicia R. Kennon
William M. Pao David McDonough
9 Jose Maria D. Patino, Jr. WOOD, SMITH, HENNING & BERMAN LLP
SETAREH LAW GROUP 1401 Willow Pass Road, Suite 700
10 315 S Beverly Drive Suite 315 Concord, CA 94520
Beverly Hill, CA 90212 Tel: (925) 222-3336
11 Tel: (310) 888-7771 E-Mail: AKennon@wshblaw.com
E-Mail: shaun@setarehlaw.com DMcDonough@wshblaw.com
12 william@setarehlaw.com
jose@setarehlaw.com
13
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Kiki Chess Attorneys for Defendant, MOBILEONE, LLC
14
Superior Court for the County of San Mateo David Yeremian
15 Hon. Marie S. Weiner Roman Shkodnik
Courtroom 2E DAVID YEREMIAN & ASSOCIATES INC
16 400 County Center 535 N Brand Blvd Suite 705
Redwood City, CA 94063 Glendale, CA 91203
17 E-Mail: complexcivil@sanmateocourt.org Tel: (818) 230-8380
E-Mail: david@yeremianlaw.com
18 Courtesy Copies pursuant to Case roman@yeremianlaw.com
Management Order #1
19 Walter Haines
UNITED EMPLOYEES LAW GROUP PC
20 5500 Bolsa Ave Suite 201
Huntington Beach, CA 92649
21 Tel: (310) 652-2242
E-Mail: whaines@eulglaw.com
22
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Vivian Ly
23
BY EMAIL On June 16, 2020, I caused the above-referenced document(s) to be sent in
24 electronic PDF format as an attachment to an email addressed to the person(s) on whom such
document(s) is/are to be served at the email address(es) shown above, as last given by that
25 person(s) or as obtained from an internet website(s) relating to such person(s), and I did not
26 receive an email response upon sending such email indicating that such email was not delivered.
27 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Executed on June 16, 2020, at San
28 Diego, California.
BUCHALTER
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
SAN DIEGO
8
DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER
TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
1 I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose
direction the service was made. Executed on June 16, 2020, at San Diego, California.
2
3 Candice Caufield
(Signature)
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
BUCHALTER
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
SAN DIEGO
9
DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER
TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
Preview
1 BUCHALTER A Professional Corporation 2 TRACY A. WARREN (SBN: 228013) 6/16/2020 KATHRYN B. FOX (SBN: 279705) 3 RICK A. WALTMAN (SBN: 306463) 655 West Broadway, Suite 1625 4 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: 619.219.5335 5 Email: twarren@buchalter.com 6 Attorneys for Defendant MOBILE ONE, LLC 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 10 UNLIMITED JURISDICTION 11 In re MOBILEONE WAGE AND CASE NO. JCCP 5039 HOUR CASES, Assigned to Honorable Marie S. Weiner 12 Department: 2 Coordination Proceeding 13 Special Title (CRC Rule. 3.550) DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST 14 AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT 15 Included Actions: 16 Kiki Chess vs. MobileOne LLC 17 San Mateo County Superior Court Case No. 18 CIV 02731 18 Vivian Ly vs. MobileOne LLC 19 Sacramento Superior Court Case No. 34-2018-00243020 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 BUCHALTER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION SAN DIEGO 1 DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT 1 Defendant MobileOne LLC (“Defendant”) hereby answers the unverified First Amended 2 Consolidated Complaint of Plaintiffs Kiki Chess and Vivian Ly (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), as 3 follows: 4 GENERAL DENIAL 5 Pursuant to the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure section 431.30, Defendant 6 denies, generally and specifically, each and every allegation, statement, and matter, and each 7 purported cause of action contained in Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Complaint, and, 8 without limiting the generality of the foregoing, denies generally and specifically that Plaintiffs 9 have been damaged in any way at all by reason of any acts or omissions of Defendant. 10 ADDITIONAL DEFENSES 11 In further answer to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Complaint, Defendant alleges 12 the following additional defenses. In asserting these defenses, Defendant does not assume the 13 burden of proof as to matters that, pursuant to law, are Plaintiffs’ burden to prove. 14 FIRST DEFENSE 15 (Failure to State a Cause of Action) 16 1. As to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Complaint, or any purported cause of 17 action therein alleged, Plaintiffs fail to state facts sufficient to constitute claims upon which relief 18 can be granted against Defendant. 19 SECOND DEFENSE 20 (Statute of Limitations) 21 2. Plaintiffs’ purported causes of action are barred, in whole or in part, to the extent 22 Plaintiffs seek relief for any purported claims that were not brought before the expiration of the 23 applicable statute(s) of limitations. 24 THIRD DEFENSE 25 (Estoppel) 26 3. Plaintiffs, by their conduct, are estopped to assert any cause of action against 27 Defendant. 28 /// BUCHALTER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION SAN DIEGO 2 DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT 1 FOURTH DEFENSE 2 (Waiver) 3 4. Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Complaint, and each and every cause of 4 action alleged therein, is barred by the doctrine of waiver. 5 FIFTH DEFENSE 6 (Unclean Hands) 7 5. Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Complaint, and each and every cause of 8 action alleged therein, is barred by the doctrine of unclean hands. 9 SIXTH DEFENSE 10 (Release) 11 6. The claims of Plaintiffs and putative class members are barred to the extent they 12 executed a release of claims or were a class member in a settlement class that extinguished their 13 claims, in whole or in part. 14 SEVENTH DEFENSE 15 (Excessive Penalties Unconstitutional) 16 7. The penalties claimed by Plaintiffs in this case are excessive and thus violate 17 Defendant’s rights under the state and federal Constitutions. 18 EIGHTH DEFENSE 19 (No Willful Violation of Labor Code Section 203) 20 8. Plaintiffs’ claims for Labor Code section 203 penalties fail because Defendant did 21 not willfully fail to comply with the requirements of the California Labor Code, including, without 22 limitation, sections 201 and 202. 23 NINTH DEFENSE 24 (Good Faith Dispute) 25 9. Neither Plaintiffs nor the putative class members are entitled to Labor Code section 26 203 penalties because a good faith dispute exists as to the monies allegedly owed at the time of the 27 termination of employment, such that Defendant cannot be held to have willfully failed to comply 28 with the requirements of the applicable Labor Code sections. BUCHALTER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION SAN DIEGO 3 DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT 1 TENTH DEFENSE 2 (Meal Periods Provided) 3 10. Plaintiffs’ claims for penalties and damages arising out of alleged meal period 4 violations are barred because Defendant provided the opportunity to Plaintiffs and the putative class 5 members to take timely meal breaks, and Defendant is not liable for unpaid wages, damages, or 6 penalties, or otherwise responsible, when Plaintiffs or putative class members voluntarily elect not 7 to use the meal period opportunities provided to them. 8 ELEVENTH DEFENSE 9 (Rest Breaks Authorized and Permitted) 10 11. Plaintiffs’ claims for penalties and damages arising out of alleged rest break 11 violations are barred because Defendant provided the opportunity to, and authorized and permitted, 12 Plaintiffs and the putative class members to take timely rest breaks, and Defendant is not liable for 13 unpaid wages, damages, or penalties, or otherwise responsible, when Plaintiffs or putative class 14 members voluntarily elect not to use the rest break opportunities provided to them. 15 TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 16 (No Suffering or Permitting to Work) 17 12. Plaintiffs’ claims for unpaid wages are barred to the extent that they performed work 18 without notifying Defendant and Defendant was not otherwise aware the work was being done. 19 THIRTEENTH DEFENSE 20 (Set Off) 21 13. To the extent that Plaintiffs and/or putative class members are entitled to damages 22 or penalties, Defendant is entitled to an offset for any overpayments of wages or other consideration 23 previously provided to those parties. 24 FOURTEENTH DEFENSE 25 (Non-Certifiable Class) 26 14. As to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Complaint, or any purported cause of 27 action therein alleged, Plaintiffs fail to state facts, and are unable to state facts, sufficient to certify 28 a class and this action is not properly brought as a class or collective action. BUCHALTER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION SAN DIEGO 4 DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT 1 FIFTEENTH DEFENSE 2 (Inadequate Representative) 3 15. Plaintiffs, and each of them, fail to serve as an adequate representative of any class 4 that they seek to represent in this action. 5 SIXTEENTH DEFENSE 6 (De Minimis) 7 16. Any time that Plaintiffs or the putative class members worked for which they were 8 not compensated, if any, was de minimis and therefore not compensable. 9 SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 10 (No Section 17200 Standing) 11 17. Plaintiffs’ claims under Business & Professions Code section 17200, et seq., are 12 barred to the extent that Plaintiffs lack standing to sue pursuant to Business & Professions Code 13 sections 12703 and 12704. 14 EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 15 (No Recovery Under UCL) 16 18. Plaintiffs improperly seek through their cause of action under Business & 17 Professions Code section 17200 (the “UCL”) to recover monies that are not recoverable under the 18 UCL. 19 NINETEENTH DEFENSE 20 (Exemption) 21 19. Each and every cause of action alleged in Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated 22 Complaint that pertains to Plaintiff Kiki Chess and all other exempt employees fails as a matter of 23 law because Plaintiff Kiki Chess and those other exempt employees were properly classified as 24 exempt employees. 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// BUCHALTER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION SAN DIEGO 5 DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT 1 TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 2 (Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies) 3 20. To the extent Plaintiffs have failed to meet the prerequisites to bringing suit under 4 the Private Attorney General Act of 2004, Cal. Lab. Code section 2698, et seq., their claims are 5 barred. 6 TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 7 (Accord and Satisfaction) 8 21. Defendant alleges that Plaintiffs’ purported causes of action as set forth in Plaintiffs’ 9 First Amended Consolidated Complaint and the claims of some or all of the purported class 10 members are barred, in whole or in part, by the principles of accord and satisfaction, and payment. 11 TWENTY-SECOND DEFENSE 12 (Arbitration) 13 22. Plaintiffs are barred from representing each and every putative class member who 14 agreed to arbitrate any or all of the purported claims alleged in the First Amended Consolidated 15 Complaint. 16 TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 17 (Reservation of Defenses) 18 23. Defendant has insufficient knowledge or information on which to form a belief as 19 to whether they may have additional, as yet unstated, affirmative defenses available. Defendant 20 therefore reserves the right to assert additional affirmative defenses in the event discovery indicates 21 that they may be appropriate. 22 23 WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for judgment as follows: 24 1. That Plaintiffs take nothing by their unverified First Amended Consolidated Complaint; 25 2. That judgment be entered in favor of Defendant and against Plaintiffs on all causes of 26 action; 27 3. That Defendant be awarded reasonable attorneys’ fees according to proof, as applicable; 28 4. That Defendant be awarded the costs of suit incurred herein; and BUCHALTER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION SAN DIEGO 6 DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT 1 5. That Defendant be awarded such other and further relief as the Court may deem 2 appropriate and proper. 3 DATED: June 16, 2020 BUCHALTER 4 A Professional Corporation 5 6 By: TRACY A. WARREN 7 KATHRYN B. FOX RICK A. WALTMAN 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 BUCHALTER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION SAN DIEGO 7 DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 I am employed in the County of San Diego, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My business address is at BUCHALTER, A Professional 3 Corporation, 655 West Broadway, Suite 1625, San Diego, CA 92101. 4 On the date set forth below, I served the foregoing document described as: 5 1. DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT 6 on all other parties and/or their attorney(s) of record to this action by ☒ emailing and/or 7 ☐ placing a true copy thereof in a sealed envelope as follows: 8 Shaun Setareh Alicia R. Kennon William M. Pao David McDonough 9 Jose Maria D. Patino, Jr. WOOD, SMITH, HENNING & BERMAN LLP SETAREH LAW GROUP 1401 Willow Pass Road, Suite 700 10 315 S Beverly Drive Suite 315 Concord, CA 94520 Beverly Hill, CA 90212 Tel: (925) 222-3336 11 Tel: (310) 888-7771 E-Mail: AKennon@wshblaw.com E-Mail: shaun@setarehlaw.com DMcDonough@wshblaw.com 12 william@setarehlaw.com jose@setarehlaw.com 13 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Kiki Chess Attorneys for Defendant, MOBILEONE, LLC 14 Superior Court for the County of San Mateo David Yeremian 15 Hon. Marie S. Weiner Roman Shkodnik Courtroom 2E DAVID YEREMIAN & ASSOCIATES INC 16 400 County Center 535 N Brand Blvd Suite 705 Redwood City, CA 94063 Glendale, CA 91203 17 E-Mail: complexcivil@sanmateocourt.org Tel: (818) 230-8380 E-Mail: david@yeremianlaw.com 18 Courtesy Copies pursuant to Case roman@yeremianlaw.com Management Order #1 19 Walter Haines UNITED EMPLOYEES LAW GROUP PC 20 5500 Bolsa Ave Suite 201 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 21 Tel: (310) 652-2242 E-Mail: whaines@eulglaw.com 22 Attorneys for Plaintiff, Vivian Ly 23 BY EMAIL On June 16, 2020, I caused the above-referenced document(s) to be sent in 24 electronic PDF format as an attachment to an email addressed to the person(s) on whom such document(s) is/are to be served at the email address(es) shown above, as last given by that 25 person(s) or as obtained from an internet website(s) relating to such person(s), and I did not 26 receive an email response upon sending such email indicating that such email was not delivered. 27 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Executed on June 16, 2020, at San 28 Diego, California. BUCHALTER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION SAN DIEGO 8 DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT 1 I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. Executed on June 16, 2020, at San Diego, California. 2 3 Candice Caufield (Signature) 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 BUCHALTER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION SAN DIEGO 9 DEFENDANT MOBILEONE LLC’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST AMENDED CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT