Preview
e n c
~ "38Co —™ a
Scott Edward Cole, Esq. (S.B. #160744) ALAMEDA COUNTY
=
Andrew Daniel Weaver, Esq. (S.B. #318935)
SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC
| JUL 3 1 2019 ;
HY
555 12" Street, Suite 1725
Oakland, California 94607
CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR GOURT:
WW
Telephone: 8 10) 891-9800 |
Facsimile: (510) 891-7030 Bayelsa penuty ,
BR
‘Email: scole@scalaw.com
Email: aweaver@scalaw.com
A
Web: . www.scalaw.com
Attorneys for Representative Plaintiff
ND
and the Plaintiff Class
Diana Estrada (State Bar No. 212702)
Pe
Email; Diana.Estrada@wilsonelser.com
WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ,
oo
EDELMAN & DICKER LLP
525 Market Street, 17'" Floor
AS =
San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone: (21 3 443-5100
Facsimile: (213) 443-5101
GEBTDHN
Attorneys for Defendants
‘PPH PRANCHISE HOLDINGS, LLC and
PASSPORT HEALTH HOLDINGS, LLC
-_
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SEAR =
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
MARK TIRMAN, individually, and on
behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
SKRBE
STIPULATION AND
, PROPOSED] ORDER
NY DN WwW
“VS. RE; FILING OF PLAINTIFF'S FIRST
AMENDED COMPLAINT
PPH FRANCHISE HOLDINGS, LLC,
PASSPORT HEALTH HOLDINGS, LLC
and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,
BE YW
Defendants.
YN
A
xm 2X
PM
-l-
Stipulation and [Proposedy Order re: Filing of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint
The parties, Plaintiff Mark Tirman (“Plaintiff”), and Defendants PPH Franchise Holdings,
AWD —
LUC and Passport Health Holdings, LLC (“Defendants”), acting through their respective counsel of
record, hereby stipulate as follows: ,
WHEREAS, on May 14, 2019, pursuant to Labor Code section 2699.3, Plaintiff gave notice
to Defendants and to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (“LLWDA”) of alleged Labor
HW
Code violations committed by Defendants; |
RA
WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed his Complaint on May 2, 2019, asserting causes of action for (1)
unlawful failure to-pay wages, (2) failure to provide meal and rest periods, (3) failure to provide
em
accurate itemized wage statements, (4) failure to pay wages on termination, and (5) unfair business
©
practices under the Unfair Competition Act; 7 .
&Fperk®sbveecriaancrtaanazts
WHEREAS, more than 65 days have passed since Plaintiff gave the aforementioned notice
and the LWDA has failed to respond to Plaintiff's notice in any way (see Cal. Lab. Code §
oe
2699,3(a\(2)(A)); |
=
WHEREAS, Plaintiff seeks to amend his Complaint to include a Private Attorneys General
—-—
Act (“PAGA”) cause of action; :
—-—
WHEREAS, Plaintiff has drafted a proposed First Amended Complaint, attached hereto as
Exhibit “A,” which includes a PAGA cause of action. In all other materia! respects, Plaintiff's
=
proposed First Amended Complaint is the same as the previously filed operative Complaint;
—
IT IS THEREFORE STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto,
—-
through their attorneys of record, that Plaintiff should be granted leave to amend in order to file
NY
Exhibit “A” as his First Amended Complaint.
NY
YN
MIN
eouaenkk
Mf
BP
Mt
YPN
Wd
-2-
Stipulation and [Preposed] Order re: Filing of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint
ivrds SO STIPULATED.
ys
Dated: July. 2 im 2019 SCOTT: COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC
=a
tive: Pleintith
=
Dated: duly. wi,
2255 5019
SS
By:.
Diana Estr ada, Baa.
’ Attorneys for Defendants
PPH FRANCHISE HOLDINGS, LLG aiid
OSB
PASSPORT HEALTH HOLDINS, LEG
Aart
26 |
Stipulation-and Prepesed] Onderie: Filing:oFPlaintiff s First. Amended Complaint
ORDER
ww
The parties having so stipulated, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffis granted leave
Ww
to amend to file Exhibit “A” as his First Amended Complaint.
&®
IT IS SO ORDERED. ©
UW
DAD
Dated: A/a) ha
The Honorable Bra Seligman
ON
Judge of the Superio
20
H AS
U
APC
COLE & ASSOCIATES,
27 5
SES
55522" STREET,
ATLAW
CA 94607
TEL: (510) 891-9800
SUITE
QAKLAND,
ADE
ATYORNEYS
KR RONSPS
SCOTT
.
eo UA
MN Ye HNN N —
A. :
Stipulation and [Rropesed] Order re: Filing of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint
EXHIBITA
Scott Edward Cole, Esq. (S.B. #160744)
(S.B. #318935)
—
Andrew Daniel Weaver, Esq.
SCOTT COLE & ASSOC ATES, APC
NY
555 12" Street, Suite 1725
Oakland, California 94607 -
W
Telephone: (510) 891-9800
Facsimile: (510) 891-7030
Email: scole@scalaw.com
&
Email: aweaver@scalaw.com
Web: www.scalaw.com
HN
Attomeys for Representative Plaintiff,
Agegrieved Employees, and the Plaintiff Class
Ss
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Soa
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
ow
fon]
—
MARK TIRMAN, individually, and on Case No. RG19017399
pony
—
behalf of all others similarly situated,
INDIVIDUAL AND CLASS ACTION .
SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC
nN
—
Plaintiff,
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
SUITE 1725
Ww
DAMAGES, INJUNCTIVE RELIEF,
_—
§5§ 127! STREET,
VS.
OAKLAND, CA 94607
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
TEL: (510) 891-9800
RESTITUTION, AND CIVIL PENALTIES
ont
dS
PPH FRANCHISE HOLDINGS, LLC, PURSUANT TO PRIVATE ATTORNEYS
PASSPORT HEALTH HOLDINGS, LLC GENERAL ACT
wn
—
and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, —
nN
—
Defendants. [JURY TRIAL DEMANDED]
“sa
—
ay
©
Representative Plaintiff alleges as follows:
oO
—
we
o
TRODUCTION
nN
_
1. This is an individual and class action seeking unpaid regular and overtime wages,
NO
nN
including unpaid compensation for meal and/or rest period violations, interest thereon, liquidated
we
ON
damages and other penalties, injunctive and other equitable relief, and reasonable attorneys’ fees
Nw
ooo
and costs under, inter alia, California Labor Code §§ 98.6, 200-204, inclusive, 226, 226.7, 226.8,
rors
ie)
510, 512, 558, 1174, 1174.5, 1194, 1194.2, 1197, 1 198, 2699, Califomia Business and Professions
No
nN
Code §§ 17200, et seg. and California Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5. Plaintiff Mark Tirman
N
~
(“Representative Plaintiff’ or “Plaintiff’) brings this action on behalf of himself and all other
oo
N
-|-
First Amended Complaint for Damages, Injunctive Relief, Restitution, and PAGA Penalties
persons similarly situated (“Class Members” and/or the “Plaintiff Class”) who are or have been
Nom
employed by defendant PPH Franchise Holdings,
LLC and/or Passport Health Holdings, LLC
(“Defendant”) as non-exempt nurse within the State of California within the applicable class
WD
period. |
BR
2. For the class allegations, the period is designated as the time from May 2, 2015
AH
through trial, based upon the allegation that the violations of California’s wage and hour laws, as
DH
described more fully below, have been ongoing throughout that time.
HN
3. During the class period, Defendant has had a consistent policy of (1) unlawfully
Oo
denying Plaintiff and Class Members: statutorily-mandated meal and rest periods, (2) willfully
oO
failing to provide Plaintiff and Class Members with accurate semimonthly itemized wage
OC
statements reflecting the total number of hours each worked, the applicable deductions, and the
S&S
applicable hourly rates in effect during the pay period and (3) willfully failing to pay compensation
imme
SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC
NY
in a prompt and timely manner to Plaintiff and those Class Members whose employment with
Ww
§55 12 STREET, SUITE 1725
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
OAKLAND, CA 94607
TEL: (510) 891-9800
Defendant has terminated. .
BR
4. Defendant operates a medical office within California for which Representative
HA
Plaintiff worked as a non-exempt nurse. The Representative Plaintiff is informed and believes-and,
DH
on that basis, alleges that, within the Class Period, Defendant employed dozens of individuals in
ONT
California in recent years to perform vaccinations and other nurse functions, employment positions
which did not, and currently do not, meet any known test for exemption from the payment of
DO
overtime wages and/or the entitlement to meal or rest periods.
COD
DR
5. Despite actual knowledge of these facts and legal mandates, Defendant has and
S|§
NR
continues to enjoy an advantage over its competition and a resultant disadvantage to its workers
KR
NH
by electing not to pay all wages due (missed meal and rest period compensation) and/or all
NY
YO
penalties due (including “waiting time” penalties) to its California based non-exempt nurses.
F&F
NHN
6. Representative Plaintiff is informed and believes and, based thereon, alleges that
UN
NH
Defendant's officers knew of these facts and legal mandates yet, nonetheless, repeatedly
DN
NH
authorized and/or ratified the violation of the laws cited herein.
sy
NY
ao
NN
-2-
First Amended Complaint for Damages, Injunctive Relief, Restitution, and PAGA Penalties
7. Despite Defendant’s knowledge of Class Members’ entitlement to meal and/or rest
&
periods for all applicable work periods, Defendant failed to provide the same to Class Members,
DH
in violation of California state statutes, the applicable California Industrial Welfare Commission
WY
Wage Order, and Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations.
BB
8. This action is brought to redress and end this prolonged pattern of unlawful conduct
HW
once and for all. | _
DN
JURISDICTION
AND VENUE
NY
9. This Court has jurisdiction over the Representative Plaintiff's and Class Members’
oOo
claims for unpaid wages, expenses and/or penalties under, inter alia, the applicable Industrial
Welfare Commission Wage Order, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, various sections
SG
of the California Labor Code, and/or the California Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5.
HB
10. Additionally, this Court has jurisdiction over the Representative Plaintiff's and
HH
SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC
Class Members’ claims for injunctive relief and restitution of ill-gotten benefits arising from
g55 12" STREET, SUITE 1725
wD
ATTORNEYS ATLAW |
CA 94607
TEL: (510) 891-9800
Defendant’s unfair and/or fraudulent business practices under California Business & Professions | .
RR
OAKLAND,
Code § 17200, et seg.
DAW
11. Finally, this Court has jurisdiction over the Representative Plaintiff's individual
claims for damages and penalties.
IT
12. Venue as to Defendant is proper in this judicial district pursuant to California Code
Om
of Civil Procedure § 395(a). Defendant owns and operates a medical office within the County of
Alameda (where Plaintiff and numerous Class Members worked), transacts business, has agents, .
SF
and is otherwise within this Court’s jurisdiction for purposes of service of process. The unlawful
KF
acts alleged herein have and have had a direct effect on Representative Plaintiff and those similarly
NN
situated within the State of California and within the County of Alameda.
YW
PLAINTIFF
BRB
13. Representative Plaintiff Mark Tirman is a natural person who was employed by
AW
Defendant as a non-exempt nurse during the Class Period.
A
oN
. -3-
First Amended Complaint for Damages, Injunctive Relief, Restitution, and PAGA Penalties
.
14. _ In these capacities, Representative Plaintiff is and was entitled to full, uninterrupted
—
and statutorily-mandated meal and rest periods, as well as other benefits of employment as set
WHY
forth herein.
WH
Lf
DEFENDANT
OH
15. Representative Plaintiff is informed and believes and, based thereon, alleges that,
TIAN
at all times herein relevant, defendants PPH Franchise Holdings, LLC and Passport Health
Holdings, LLC did business within the State of California as a medical office.
oOo
16. Those defendants identified as Does 1 through 100, inclusive, are and were, at all
oOo
relevant times herein-mentioned, officers, directors, partners, and/or managing agents of some or
—_
OS
each of the remaining defendants. Representative Plaintiff is informed and believes and, on that
—|§
_
basis, alleges that at all relevant times herein mentioned, defendants PPH Franchise Holdings,
SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC
YY
—
LLC, Passport Health Holdings, LLC and those identified as Does 1 through 100, inclusive,
555 12 STREET, SUITS 1725
WY
—
*
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
OAKLAND, CA 94607
‘TEL: (510) 891-9800
employed, and/or exercised control over the wages, hours, and/or working conditions of the
FF
—
Representative Plaintiff and Class Members within the State of California.
UH
—
| 17. The Representative Plaintiff is unaware of the true names and capacities of those
DH
—
defendants sued herein as Does 1 through 100, inclusive and, therefore, sues these defendants by
NI
—
such fictitious names. The Representative Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend this
—
Oe
Complaint when such names are ascertained. The Representative Plaintiff is informed and believes
ose,
and, on that basis, alleges that each of the fictitiously-named defendants was responsible in some
DGD
N
manner for, gave consent to, ratified, and/or authorized the conduct herein alleged and that the
ie)
KK
Representative Plaintiff's and Class Members’ damages, as herein alleged, were proximately
HY
N
caused thereby.
No
WY
18. Representative Plaintiff is informed and believes and, on that basis, alleges that, at
ro
BR
{tall relevant times herein mentioned, each of the defendants was the agent and/or employee of each
RH
np
of the remaining defendants and, in doing the acts herein alleged, was acting within the course and
NHN
nN
scope of such agency and/or employment.
nt
te
to
ao
4-
First Amended Complaint for Damages, Injunctive Relief, Restitution, and PAGA Penalties
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
—
19. The Representative Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and as a class
NY
action on behalf of all persons similarly situated and proximately damaged by Defendant’s conduct
WwW
including, but not necessarily limited to; the following Plaintiff Class:
PF
“All persons employed by Defendant as a non-exempt nurse in
NW
California at any time on or after May 2, 2015”
DAN
20. Defendant’s officers and directors are excluded from the Plaintiff Class.
UY
21. This action has been brought and may properly be maintained as a class action.
Oo
under California Code of Civil Procedure § 382 because there is a well-defined community of
“Oo
interest in the litigation and the proposed Class is easily ascertainable. |
a. Numerosity: A class action is the only available method for the fair
and efficient adjudication of this controversy. The members of the
Plaintiff Class are so numerous that joinder of all members is
eee
SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC
impractical, if not impossible, insofar as Representative Plaintiff is
informed and believes and, on that basis, alleges that there are
555 12™4 STREET, SUITE 1725
sufficient Class Members to meet the numerosity requirement.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
CA 94607
TEL: (510) 891-9800
OAKLAND,
Membership in the Class will be determined upon analysis of
employee and payroll, among other, records maintained by
Defendant.
b. Commonality: The Representative Plaintiff and the Class Members
share a community of interests in that there are numerous common
_ questions and issues of fact and law which predominate over any
questions and issues solely affecting individual members, including,
but not necessarily limited to:
1) Whether Defendant violated Califomia Business and
mw
Professions Code § 17200, et seq. by failing to provide meal
and/or rest breaks to Class Members working eligible shifts;
DR
2) Whether Defendant violated California Labor Code § 1174 by
RD
_ failing to keep accurate records of employees’ hours of work;
BD
3) Whether Defendant violated California Labor Code §§ 201-204
by failing to pay wages due and owing at the time that certain
DW
Class Members’ employment with Defendant terminated;
NY
4) Whether Defendant violated California Labor Code § 226 by
failing to provide semimonthly itemized statements to Class
BY
Preview
e n c ~ "38Co —™ a Scott Edward Cole, Esq. (S.B. #160744) ALAMEDA COUNTY = Andrew Daniel Weaver, Esq. (S.B. #318935) SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC | JUL 3 1 2019 ; HY 555 12" Street, Suite 1725 Oakland, California 94607 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR GOURT: WW Telephone: 8 10) 891-9800 | Facsimile: (510) 891-7030 Bayelsa penuty , BR ‘Email: scole@scalaw.com Email: aweaver@scalaw.com A Web: . www.scalaw.com Attorneys for Representative Plaintiff ND and the Plaintiff Class Diana Estrada (State Bar No. 212702) Pe Email; Diana.Estrada@wilsonelser.com WILSON, ELSER, MOSKOWITZ, oo EDELMAN & DICKER LLP 525 Market Street, 17'" Floor AS = San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (21 3 443-5100 Facsimile: (213) 443-5101 GEBTDHN Attorneys for Defendants ‘PPH PRANCHISE HOLDINGS, LLC and PASSPORT HEALTH HOLDINGS, LLC -_ IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SEAR = IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA MARK TIRMAN, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, SKRBE STIPULATION AND , PROPOSED] ORDER NY DN WwW “VS. RE; FILING OF PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT PPH FRANCHISE HOLDINGS, LLC, PASSPORT HEALTH HOLDINGS, LLC and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, BE YW Defendants. YN A xm 2X PM -l- Stipulation and [Proposedy Order re: Filing of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint The parties, Plaintiff Mark Tirman (“Plaintiff”), and Defendants PPH Franchise Holdings, AWD — LUC and Passport Health Holdings, LLC (“Defendants”), acting through their respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: , WHEREAS, on May 14, 2019, pursuant to Labor Code section 2699.3, Plaintiff gave notice to Defendants and to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency (“LLWDA”) of alleged Labor HW Code violations committed by Defendants; | RA WHEREAS, Plaintiff filed his Complaint on May 2, 2019, asserting causes of action for (1) unlawful failure to-pay wages, (2) failure to provide meal and rest periods, (3) failure to provide em accurate itemized wage statements, (4) failure to pay wages on termination, and (5) unfair business © practices under the Unfair Competition Act; 7 . &Fperk®sbveecriaancrtaanazts WHEREAS, more than 65 days have passed since Plaintiff gave the aforementioned notice and the LWDA has failed to respond to Plaintiff's notice in any way (see Cal. Lab. Code § oe 2699,3(a\(2)(A)); | = WHEREAS, Plaintiff seeks to amend his Complaint to include a Private Attorneys General —-— Act (“PAGA”) cause of action; : —-— WHEREAS, Plaintiff has drafted a proposed First Amended Complaint, attached hereto as Exhibit “A,” which includes a PAGA cause of action. In all other materia! respects, Plaintiff's = proposed First Amended Complaint is the same as the previously filed operative Complaint; — IT IS THEREFORE STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, —- through their attorneys of record, that Plaintiff should be granted leave to amend in order to file NY Exhibit “A” as his First Amended Complaint. NY YN MIN eouaenkk Mf BP Mt YPN Wd -2- Stipulation and [Preposed] Order re: Filing of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint ivrds SO STIPULATED. ys Dated: July. 2 im 2019 SCOTT: COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC =a tive: Pleintith = Dated: duly. wi, 2255 5019 SS By:. Diana Estr ada, Baa. ’ Attorneys for Defendants PPH FRANCHISE HOLDINGS, LLG aiid OSB PASSPORT HEALTH HOLDINS, LEG Aart 26 | Stipulation-and Prepesed] Onderie: Filing:oFPlaintiff s First. Amended Complaint ORDER ww The parties having so stipulated, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffis granted leave Ww to amend to file Exhibit “A” as his First Amended Complaint. &® IT IS SO ORDERED. © UW DAD Dated: A/a) ha The Honorable Bra Seligman ON Judge of the Superio 20 H AS U APC COLE & ASSOCIATES, 27 5 SES 55522" STREET, ATLAW CA 94607 TEL: (510) 891-9800 SUITE QAKLAND, ADE ATYORNEYS KR RONSPS SCOTT . eo UA MN Ye HNN N — A. : Stipulation and [Rropesed] Order re: Filing of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint EXHIBITA Scott Edward Cole, Esq. (S.B. #160744) (S.B. #318935) — Andrew Daniel Weaver, Esq. SCOTT COLE & ASSOC ATES, APC NY 555 12" Street, Suite 1725 Oakland, California 94607 - W Telephone: (510) 891-9800 Facsimile: (510) 891-7030 Email: scole@scalaw.com & Email: aweaver@scalaw.com Web: www.scalaw.com HN Attomeys for Representative Plaintiff, Agegrieved Employees, and the Plaintiff Class Ss IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Soa IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA ow fon] — MARK TIRMAN, individually, and on Case No. RG19017399 pony — behalf of all others similarly situated, INDIVIDUAL AND CLASS ACTION . SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC nN — Plaintiff, FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR SUITE 1725 Ww DAMAGES, INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, _— §5§ 127! STREET, VS. OAKLAND, CA 94607 ATTORNEYS AT LAW TEL: (510) 891-9800 RESTITUTION, AND CIVIL PENALTIES ont dS PPH FRANCHISE HOLDINGS, LLC, PURSUANT TO PRIVATE ATTORNEYS PASSPORT HEALTH HOLDINGS, LLC GENERAL ACT wn — and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, — nN — Defendants. [JURY TRIAL DEMANDED] “sa — ay © Representative Plaintiff alleges as follows: oO — we o TRODUCTION nN _ 1. This is an individual and class action seeking unpaid regular and overtime wages, NO nN including unpaid compensation for meal and/or rest period violations, interest thereon, liquidated we ON damages and other penalties, injunctive and other equitable relief, and reasonable attorneys’ fees Nw ooo and costs under, inter alia, California Labor Code §§ 98.6, 200-204, inclusive, 226, 226.7, 226.8, rors ie) 510, 512, 558, 1174, 1174.5, 1194, 1194.2, 1197, 1 198, 2699, Califomia Business and Professions No nN Code §§ 17200, et seg. and California Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5. Plaintiff Mark Tirman N ~ (“Representative Plaintiff’ or “Plaintiff’) brings this action on behalf of himself and all other oo N -|- First Amended Complaint for Damages, Injunctive Relief, Restitution, and PAGA Penalties persons similarly situated (“Class Members” and/or the “Plaintiff Class”) who are or have been Nom employed by defendant PPH Franchise Holdings, LLC and/or Passport Health Holdings, LLC (“Defendant”) as non-exempt nurse within the State of California within the applicable class WD period. | BR 2. For the class allegations, the period is designated as the time from May 2, 2015 AH through trial, based upon the allegation that the violations of California’s wage and hour laws, as DH described more fully below, have been ongoing throughout that time. HN 3. During the class period, Defendant has had a consistent policy of (1) unlawfully Oo denying Plaintiff and Class Members: statutorily-mandated meal and rest periods, (2) willfully oO failing to provide Plaintiff and Class Members with accurate semimonthly itemized wage OC statements reflecting the total number of hours each worked, the applicable deductions, and the S&S applicable hourly rates in effect during the pay period and (3) willfully failing to pay compensation imme SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC NY in a prompt and timely manner to Plaintiff and those Class Members whose employment with Ww §55 12 STREET, SUITE 1725 ATTORNEYS AT LAW OAKLAND, CA 94607 TEL: (510) 891-9800 Defendant has terminated. . BR 4. Defendant operates a medical office within California for which Representative HA Plaintiff worked as a non-exempt nurse. The Representative Plaintiff is informed and believes-and, DH on that basis, alleges that, within the Class Period, Defendant employed dozens of individuals in ONT California in recent years to perform vaccinations and other nurse functions, employment positions which did not, and currently do not, meet any known test for exemption from the payment of DO overtime wages and/or the entitlement to meal or rest periods. COD DR 5. Despite actual knowledge of these facts and legal mandates, Defendant has and S|§ NR continues to enjoy an advantage over its competition and a resultant disadvantage to its workers KR NH by electing not to pay all wages due (missed meal and rest period compensation) and/or all NY YO penalties due (including “waiting time” penalties) to its California based non-exempt nurses. F&F NHN 6. Representative Plaintiff is informed and believes and, based thereon, alleges that UN NH Defendant's officers knew of these facts and legal mandates yet, nonetheless, repeatedly DN NH authorized and/or ratified the violation of the laws cited herein. sy NY ao NN -2- First Amended Complaint for Damages, Injunctive Relief, Restitution, and PAGA Penalties 7. Despite Defendant’s knowledge of Class Members’ entitlement to meal and/or rest & periods for all applicable work periods, Defendant failed to provide the same to Class Members, DH in violation of California state statutes, the applicable California Industrial Welfare Commission WY Wage Order, and Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations. BB 8. This action is brought to redress and end this prolonged pattern of unlawful conduct HW once and for all. | _ DN JURISDICTION AND VENUE NY 9. This Court has jurisdiction over the Representative Plaintiff's and Class Members’ oOo claims for unpaid wages, expenses and/or penalties under, inter alia, the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, various sections SG of the California Labor Code, and/or the California Code of Civil Procedure § 1021.5. HB 10. Additionally, this Court has jurisdiction over the Representative Plaintiff's and HH SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC Class Members’ claims for injunctive relief and restitution of ill-gotten benefits arising from g55 12" STREET, SUITE 1725 wD ATTORNEYS ATLAW | CA 94607 TEL: (510) 891-9800 Defendant’s unfair and/or fraudulent business practices under California Business & Professions | . RR OAKLAND, Code § 17200, et seg. DAW 11. Finally, this Court has jurisdiction over the Representative Plaintiff's individual claims for damages and penalties. IT 12. Venue as to Defendant is proper in this judicial district pursuant to California Code Om of Civil Procedure § 395(a). Defendant owns and operates a medical office within the County of Alameda (where Plaintiff and numerous Class Members worked), transacts business, has agents, . SF and is otherwise within this Court’s jurisdiction for purposes of service of process. The unlawful KF acts alleged herein have and have had a direct effect on Representative Plaintiff and those similarly NN situated within the State of California and within the County of Alameda. YW PLAINTIFF BRB 13. Representative Plaintiff Mark Tirman is a natural person who was employed by AW Defendant as a non-exempt nurse during the Class Period. A oN . -3- First Amended Complaint for Damages, Injunctive Relief, Restitution, and PAGA Penalties . 14. _ In these capacities, Representative Plaintiff is and was entitled to full, uninterrupted — and statutorily-mandated meal and rest periods, as well as other benefits of employment as set WHY forth herein. WH Lf DEFENDANT OH 15. Representative Plaintiff is informed and believes and, based thereon, alleges that, TIAN at all times herein relevant, defendants PPH Franchise Holdings, LLC and Passport Health Holdings, LLC did business within the State of California as a medical office. oOo 16. Those defendants identified as Does 1 through 100, inclusive, are and were, at all oOo relevant times herein-mentioned, officers, directors, partners, and/or managing agents of some or —_ OS each of the remaining defendants. Representative Plaintiff is informed and believes and, on that —|§ _ basis, alleges that at all relevant times herein mentioned, defendants PPH Franchise Holdings, SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC YY — LLC, Passport Health Holdings, LLC and those identified as Does 1 through 100, inclusive, 555 12 STREET, SUITS 1725 WY — * ATTORNEYS AT LAW OAKLAND, CA 94607 ‘TEL: (510) 891-9800 employed, and/or exercised control over the wages, hours, and/or working conditions of the FF — Representative Plaintiff and Class Members within the State of California. UH — | 17. The Representative Plaintiff is unaware of the true names and capacities of those DH — defendants sued herein as Does 1 through 100, inclusive and, therefore, sues these defendants by NI — such fictitious names. The Representative Plaintiff will seek leave of court to amend this — Oe Complaint when such names are ascertained. The Representative Plaintiff is informed and believes ose, and, on that basis, alleges that each of the fictitiously-named defendants was responsible in some DGD N manner for, gave consent to, ratified, and/or authorized the conduct herein alleged and that the ie) KK Representative Plaintiff's and Class Members’ damages, as herein alleged, were proximately HY N caused thereby. No WY 18. Representative Plaintiff is informed and believes and, on that basis, alleges that, at ro BR {tall relevant times herein mentioned, each of the defendants was the agent and/or employee of each RH np of the remaining defendants and, in doing the acts herein alleged, was acting within the course and NHN nN scope of such agency and/or employment. nt te to ao 4- First Amended Complaint for Damages, Injunctive Relief, Restitution, and PAGA Penalties CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS — 19. The Representative Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and as a class NY action on behalf of all persons similarly situated and proximately damaged by Defendant’s conduct WwW including, but not necessarily limited to; the following Plaintiff Class: PF “All persons employed by Defendant as a non-exempt nurse in NW California at any time on or after May 2, 2015” DAN 20. Defendant’s officers and directors are excluded from the Plaintiff Class. UY 21. This action has been brought and may properly be maintained as a class action. Oo under California Code of Civil Procedure § 382 because there is a well-defined community of “Oo interest in the litigation and the proposed Class is easily ascertainable. | a. Numerosity: A class action is the only available method for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy. The members of the Plaintiff Class are so numerous that joinder of all members is eee SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC impractical, if not impossible, insofar as Representative Plaintiff is informed and believes and, on that basis, alleges that there are 555 12™4 STREET, SUITE 1725 sufficient Class Members to meet the numerosity requirement. ATTORNEYS AT LAW CA 94607 TEL: (510) 891-9800 OAKLAND, Membership in the Class will be determined upon analysis of employee and payroll, among other, records maintained by Defendant. b. Commonality: The Representative Plaintiff and the Class Members share a community of interests in that there are numerous common _ questions and issues of fact and law which predominate over any questions and issues solely affecting individual members, including, but not necessarily limited to: 1) Whether Defendant violated Califomia Business and mw Professions Code § 17200, et seq. by failing to provide meal and/or rest breaks to Class Members working eligible shifts; DR 2) Whether Defendant violated California Labor Code § 1174 by RD _ failing to keep accurate records of employees’ hours of work; BD 3) Whether Defendant violated California Labor Code §§ 201-204 by failing to pay wages due and owing at the time that certain DW Class Members’ employment with Defendant terminated; NY 4) Whether Defendant violated California Labor Code § 226 by failing to provide semimonthly itemized statements to Class BY