Perez v. Leprino Foods Company et al

Filing 6

ORDER RELATING and REASSIGNING Case, signed by District Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 5/23/17. (Marrujo, C)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 11 12 13 14 15 16 JOHN PEREZ and on behalf of all other similarly situated individuals, CASE NO. 1:17-CV-00686-DAD-SAB ORDER RELATING AND REASSIGNING CASE Plaintiff, LEPRINO FOODS COMPANY, a Colorado Corporation; LEPRINO FOODS DAIRY PRODUCTS COMPANY, a Colorado Corporation; and DOES 1-50, inclusive, 17 Defendants. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 On November 15, 2013, Plaintiff Jerrod Finder (“Finder”) filed a wage and hour class action against Leprino Foods Company and Leprino Foods Dairy Products Company (collectively “Leprino”), alleging California Labor Code violations including failures to provide a second meal break or accurate itemized statements, waiting time violations, Unfair Business Practices Act violations, and Private Attorneys General Act claims based on those substantive violations. On January 21, 2015, Jonathon Talavera (“Talavera”) filed a wage and hour class action against Leprino, alleging, (1) claims relating to Leprino’s donning and doffing procedure for required sanitary gear, (2) the same second meal period denial claim as Finder, and (3) claims for failure to pay all hours worked, overtime, and wages upon termination (based on both (a) the second meal period and rest period denials, and (b) the donning and doffing related claims). The 1 1 Court consolidated the two actions on November 21, 2016. Doc. 63. On January 20, 2017, the 2 Court stayed the consolidated action. Doc. 81. 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 On April 13, 2017, counsel for Talavera filed Perez v. Leprino—a new putative class action in Kings County Superior Court against Leprino, alleging claims that appear to be almost identical to those alleged in the Talavera action. Perez v. Leprino, EDCA Case No. 1:17-cv00686-DAD-SAB, Doc. 1 at 11-32. That action was removed to this Court on May 18, 2017, and assigned to District Judge Dale Drozd. Id. The following day, Leprino filed a notice of related cases. Local Rules provide that when a “Judge to whom the action with the lower or lowest number has been assigned determines that assignment of the actions to a single Judge is likely to effect a savings of judicial effort or other economies, that Judge is authorized to enter an order reassigning all higher numbered related actions to himself or herself.” Local Rule 123(c). The above-entitled action appears to involve similar questions of fact and law as Finder v. Leprino. Assignment to the same judge is likely to effect a substantial savings of judicial effort. See Local Rule 123(a)(3). Because the undersigned is assigned the lowest numbered related case, all of the above-entitled case are hereby reassigned from the dockets of District Judge Dale A. Drozd and Magistrate Judge Stanley A. Boone to the dockets of Senior District Judge Anthony Ishii and Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe. The Clerk of the Court is also respectfully directed to relate this action to Finder v. Leprino, Case No. 1:13-cv-02059-AWI-BAM. 20 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 Dated: May 23, 2017 23 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?