Keith Komarnicki v. LinkUs Enterprises, LLC et al

Filing 67

STIPULATION and DISMISSAL; ORDER, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 12/28/18. CASE CLOSED(Gonzalez, R)

5

Carolyn Hunt Cottrell (SBN 166977)
David C. Leimbach (SBN 265409)
SCHNEIDER WALLACE COTTRELL
KONECKY WOTKYNS LLP
2000 Powell Street, Suite 1400
Emeryville, California 94608
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

6

Attorneys for Plaintiff and the proposed Class

7

Additional Counsel on the following page

1
2
3
4

8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12
13

KEITH KOMARNICKI, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated,

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL; ORDER

14

15
16
17
18
19

Case No. 1:16-cv-01602-DAD-SKO

Plaintiff,
(Doc. 66)

v.
LINKUS ENTERPRISES, LLC, DISH
NETWORK L.L.C., DISH NETWORK
CALIFORNIA SERVICE CORPORATION,
and DOES 1-50, inclusive,

Judge: Honorable Dale A. Drozd
Date Removed: October 21, 2016
First Amended Complaint filed: April 19,
2017

Defendants.

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL; ORDER
Komarnicki v. LinkUs Enterprises, LLC, et al.; Case No. 1:16-cv-01602-DAD-SKO

1
2
3
4
5

Sarah R. Schalman-Bergen (pro hac vice)
Camille Fundora (pro hac vice)
BERGER & MONTAGUE, P.C.
1622 Locust Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff and the proposed Class

6
7

8
9
10
11
12
13
14

S. BRETT SUTTON 143107
[e-mail]
JARED HAGUE 251517
[e-mail]
JUSTIN VECCHIARELLI 298684
[e-mail]
SUTTON HAGUE LAW CORPORATION
5200 N. Palm Avenue, Suite 203
Fresno, California 93704
Telephone: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
LINKUS ENTERPRISES, LLC

15
16
17
18
19
20
21

MARLENE S. MURACO, Bar No. 154240
JOSE MACIAS, JR., Bar No. 265033
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
50 W. San Fernando, 15th Floor
San Jose, CA 95113-2303
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 408.288.5686
Attorneys for Defendants
DISH NETWORK L.L.C., DISH NETWORK
CALIFORNIA SERVICE CORPORATION

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL; ORDER
Komarnicki v. LinkUs Enterprises, LLC, et al.; Case No. 1:16-cv-01602-DAD-SKO

STIPULATION

1
2

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Procedure 41, this Stipulation of Dismissal is entered into by and

3 between Plaintiff Keith Komarnicki (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants LinkUs Enterprises, LLC, DISH
4 Network L.L.C., and Dish Network California Service Corporation (collectively, “Defendants”), based
5 upon the following facts:
6
7

WHEREAS, Plaintiff’s case was removed to this Court on October 21, 2016, and Plaintiff filed
his operative First Amended Complaint on April 19, 2017;

8

WHEREAS, in his First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff asserts wage and hour claims on an

9

individual and putative class basis pursuant to Federal Rule of Procedure 23, and pursuant to the

10
11
12
13
14

15
16
17
18

California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”);
WHEREAS, Plaintiff has not filed a motion for class certification, and no class has been
certified, in this action;
WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants have negotiated and consummated a settlement between
them, which fully resolves all claims alleged by Plaintiff on an individual basis;
WHEREAS, Defendants deny that there is a factual or legal basis for Plaintiff’s claims and
allegations, and deny that Plaintiff’s claims may be certified to proceed on a class basis;
WHEREAS, pursuant the settlement, Plaintiff and Defendants agree that Plaintiff will dismiss
all of his individual claims with prejudice, including the claims he has asserted under PAGA;

19

WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants agree that Plaintiff’s dismissal with prejudice of the

20

claims he has asserted under PAGA is not intended to affect the State of California’s ability to pursue

21

civil penalties pursuant to the California Labor Code;

22
23
24
25

WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants agree that Plaintiff will dismiss his putative class claims
claims without prejudice;
WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Defendants agree that they are each to bear their own attorneys’ fees
and costs with respect to this action;

26
27
28

__________________________________________________________________________________________________
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL; ORDER
Komarnicki v. LinkUs Enterprises, LLC, et al.; Case No. 1:16-cv-01602-DAD-SKO
1

1

NOW THEREFORE, based on the foregoing, the Parties hereby stipulate and request that the

2

Court dismiss the above-captioned action in its entirety, with each Party to bear their own attorneys’

3

fees and costs, as follows:

4

1. Plaintiff’s individual claims and PAGA shall be dismissed with prejudice; and

5

2. Plaintiff’s putative class claims shall be dismissed without prejudice;

6

IT IS SO STIPULATED

7

8 DATED: December 26, 2018

Respectfully Submitted,

9

13

/s/ Carolyn Hunt Cottrell
Carolyn Hunt Cottrell (SBN 166977)
SCHNEIDER WALLACE
COTTRELL KONECKY WOTKYNS LLP
2000 Powell Street, Suite 1400
Emeryville, California 94608
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
[e-mail]

14

Attorneys for Plaintiff and the proposed Class

10
11
12

15
16
17 DATED: December 26, 2018

SUTTON HAGUE LAW CORPORATION, P.C.

18

By:

19
20

/s/ Jared Hague
S. BRETT SUTTON
JARED HAGUE
Attorneys for Defendants
LINKUS ENTERPRISES, LLC

21
22
DATED: December 26, 2018

LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.

23
24
25
26
27
28

By:

/s/ Marlene S. Muraco
MARLENE S. MURACO
NEDA N. DAL CIELO
JOSE MACIAS, JR.
Attorneys for Defendants
DISH NETWORK L.L.C. AND DISH
NETWORK CALIFORNIA SERVICE
CORPORATION

__________________________________________________________________________________________________
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL; ORDER
Komarnicki v. LinkUs Enterprises, LLC, et al.; Case No. 1:16-cv-01602-DAD-SKO
2

ORDER

1
2

On December 26, 2018, the parties filed the above stipulation dismissing Plaintiff’s individual

3

and California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) claims with prejudice, and

4

dismissing Plaintiff’s putative class claims without prejudice. (Doc. 66.)

5

In light of the parties’ stipulation, Plaintiff’s individual and PAGA claims have been dismissed

6

with prejudice, Plaintiff’s putative class claims have been dismissed without prejudice, and this action

7

has been terminated. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii); Wilson v. City of San Jose, 111 F.3d 688, 692

8

(9th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11 Dated:
12

December 28, 2018

/s/

Sheila K. Oberto

.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

13
14

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

__________________________________________________________________________________________________
STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL; ORDER
Komarnicki v. LinkUs Enterprises, LLC, et al.; Case No. 1:16-cv-01602-DAD-SKO
3