Bonner v. Tesoro Refining & Marketing Company LLC

Filing 12

ORDER DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 6/28/17. (Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8
9
10

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA - SACRAMENTO
JINETRA BONNER, individually, on behalf
herself and all others similarly situated,

Case No. 17-CV-00936-WBS-DB
CLASS ACTION

11
12

Plaintiffs,
ORDER DISMISSING CERTAIN CLAIMS
vs.

13
14
15
16

TESORO REFINING & MARKETING
COMPANY, LLC, a Delaware Limited
Liability Company; and DOES 1 through 100
inclusive,
Defendants.

Complaint filed:
Removal date:
Trial date:

March 22, 2017
May 3, 2017
None set

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
[Proposed] Order Dismissing Meal Period Claims

Case No. 17-CV-00936-WBS-DB

1

Before the Court is the Parties’ Joint Stipulation to Dismiss the Meal Period Claims herein.

2

Good Cause having been shown, said Stipulation if GRANTED, and IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

3

that:

4

1.

Plaintiff’s First Cause of Action for Unlawful Use of an “On-Duty Meal Period

5

Agreement” (“ODMPA”) or alternatively, Failure to Provide Timely, Off-Duty, 30-Minute Meal

6

Periods shall be dismissed without prejudice.

7
8
9

2.

Plaintiff’s Second Cause of Action for Failure to Provide Suitable Facilities for

Meal or Rest Periods shall be dismissed without prejudice.
3.

Plaintiff’s Fifth Cause of Action for Civil Penalties under the Private Attorneys

10

General Act for non-compliant meal periods, except paragraphs 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, and

11

63, shall be dismissed without prejudice.

12

4.

Plaintiff’s Sixth Cause of Action for Civil Penalties under the Private Attorneys

13

General Act for Failure to Provide Suitable Facilities for Meal or Rest Periods shall be dismissed

14

without prejudice.

15

5.

Plaintiff’s Fourth and Eighth Causes of action shall be dismissed in part, without

16

prejudice, only to the extent those claims are predicated on the violations asserted in the First,

17

Second, Fifth, and Sixth Causes of Action.

18

6.

Any and all allegations specifically seeking relief pursuant to Wage Order 1,

19

section 11 and Labor Code sections 226.7 and 512 with respect to the alleged failure to comply

20

with meal period laws or failure to provide suitable facilities for meal or rest periods under

21

California law, including but not limited to Subclass One and Subclass Two, shall be dismissed

22

without prejudice.

23

IT IS SO ORDERED.

24

Dated: June 28, 2017

25
26
27
28
1
[Proposed] Order Dismissing Meal Period Claims

Case No. 17-CV-00936-WBS-DB