Samantha Jones v. Abercrombie & Fitch Trading Company

Filing 24

ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION TO TRANSFER TO CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA by Hon. William Alsup re 18 Motion to Transfer Case.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/6/2015) [Transferred from California Northern on 1/7/2015.]

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
8
9

SAMANTHA JONES, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14

No. C 14-04631 WHA

v.
ABERCROMBIE & FITCH TRADING CO.,
ABERCROMBIE & FITCH STORES, INC., and
DOES 1 – 100, inclusive

ORDER GRANTING
UNOPPOSED MOTION TO
TRANSFER TO CENTRAL
DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Defendants.
/

15
16
17
18
19

In this putative wage-and-hour class action, defendants’ unopposed motion to transfer to
the Central District of California is GRANTED.
*

*

*

Plaintiff Samantha Jones commenced this putative class action in San Francisco Superior

20

Court in July 2014. Defendants removed to federal court in October 2014. This action was

21

subsequently reassigned to the undersigned in November 2014.

22

In December 2014, defendants filed a motion to transfer to the Central District of

23

California under Section 1404(a) of Title 28 of the United States Code. Plaintiff filed a

24

statement of non-opposition and a declaration from counsel stating that “Plaintiff does not object

25

to Defendants’ requested transfer to the Central District . . . . on the whole, the equities favor

26

transfer of this case to the Central District” (Phelps Decl. ¶ 3).

27
28

For the reasons stated herein, the motion is GRANTED. This action could have been
brought in the Central District and transfer would serve the convenience of the majority of the
putative class members, parties, counsel, and witnesses. Ms. Jones, the plaintiff, worked in

1

defendants’ stores in the Central District from 2010 through 2014, and 54 percent of defendants’

2

stores in California were located within the Central District during the relevant time period.

3

Only 22 percent were located in the Northern District. All counsel of record for plaintiff are

4

located in Irvine, and Ms. Jones’ permanent address is in Los Angeles, according to defendants’

5

records (Talcott Decl. ¶¶ 3, 4). Because plaintiff does not oppose transferring to the Central

6

District and because the Central District is comparably the more convenient venue, this action is

7

hereby TRANSFERRED TO THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA.

8

Docket numbers 17 and 18 are hereby TERMINATED. The January 29 hearing date is

9

hereby VACATED. For the consideration of any subsequent judge assigned to this action, the
undersigned judge’s notice regarding factors to be evaluated for any proposed class settlement

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

can be found at docket number 11.

12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.

14
15

Dated: January 6, 2015.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2