Lambson v. Marriott International, Inc. et al

Filing 34

ORDER granting 33 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER FOR LEAVE FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT filed by Vernon Michael Lambson. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 10/25/2012. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/25/2012)

Case3:11-cv-06669-CRB Document33 Filed10/24/12 Page1 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

PETER M. HART (State Bar No. 198691)
[e-mail]
AMBER S. HEALY (State Bar No. 232730)
[e-mail]
KATHERINE GIROLAMO (State Bar No. 281662)
[e-mail]
LAW OFFICES OF PETER M. HART

12121 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 205
Los Angeles, California 90025
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
KENNETH H. YOON (State Bar No. 198443)
[e-mail]
LAW OFFICES OF KENNETH H. YOON
One Wilshire Blvd., Suite 2200
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Vernon Michael Lambson

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15
16
17

VERNON MICHAEL LAMBSON, as
an individual and on behalf of all others
similarly situated,

18

Plaintiff,

19

v.

20

MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL,
INC., a Delaware Corporation; THE
RITZ-CARLTON HOTEL
COMPANY, LLC, a Delaware
Corporation; and DOES 1 THROUGH
100, inclusive,

21
22
23
24

Case No. 3:11−cv−06669-CRB
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER FOR LEAVE FOR PLAINTIFF
TO FILE A SECOND AMENDED
COMPLAINT
Judge:

Hon. Charles R. Breyer

Defendants.

25
26
27
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR LEAVE TO
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT (CASE NO. 3:11-CV-06669)

Case3:11-cv-06669-CRB Document33 Filed10/24/12 Page2 of 4

1

Plaintiff Vernon Michael Lambson (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant and The Ritz-

2

Carlton Hotel Company, LLC (“Ritz-Carlton”) (“Defendant”) (collectively the “Parties”)

3

by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:

4
5
6

WHEREAS, Counsel for the Parties, have met and conferred regarding the filing
of a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”);
WHEREAS, the SAC will (i) add representative plaintiff, Dinora Martinez, (ii)

7

delete certain causes of action and allegations, (iii) add certain causes of action including

8

a claim under Labor Code § 2698, et seq., the Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”),

9

(iv) and will revise class definitions;

10

WHEREAS, without agreeing to the propriety of the same, Ritz-Carlton does not

11

oppose such an amendment, subject to reserving all its rights and defenses (including, by

12

way of example but not of limitation, all arguments regarding the substantive allegations,

13

the propriety of class certification, relations back for limitations purposes, and whether

14

Plaintiff Lambson’s and proposed Plaintiff Martinez’ claims can or should be brought in

15

the same action);

16
17
18
19

NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
1) Plaintiff may file a Second Amended Complaint, a copy of which is attached as

Exhibit A.
2) Upon entry of the Court’s Order permitting the filing of the Second Amended

20

Complaint, the Second Amended Complaint shall be deemed served. Defendant Ritz-

21

Carlton shall have thirty (30) days from the date of entry of said order to answer or

22

otherwise respond to the Second Amended Complaint.

23
24
25
26

Dated: October 24, 2012

LAW OFFICES OF PETER M. HART
By: /s/ Peter M. Hart
Peter M. Hart
Attorneys for Plaintiff

27
28
-1STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR LEAVE TO
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT (CASE NO. 3:11-CV-06669)

Case3:11-cv-06669-CRB Document33 Filed10/24/12 Page3 of 4

1
2
3
4
5

Dated: October 24, 2012

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP
By: /s/ Adam P. KohSweeney
Adam P. KohSweeney
Attorneys for Defendants Marriott
International, Inc. and The Ritz-Carlton
Hotel Company, LLC

6
7
8
9
10
11

ATTESTATION OF CONCURRENCE
Pursuant to the Court’s General Order 45, Section X(B), I hereby attest that
concurrence in the filing of this document has been obtained from the other signatory.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America
that the foregoing declaration is true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge.

12
13

Executed this 24th day October, 2012, in Los Angeles, California.

14

/s/ Peter M. Hart
Peter M. Hart

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR LEAVE TO
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT (CASE NO. 3:11-CV-06669)

Case3:11-cv-06669-CRB Document33 Filed10/24/12 Page4 of 4

1
2
3
4

[PROPOSED] ORDER
This Court has reviewed the Parties’ Stipulation for Leave for Plaintiff to File A
Second Amended Complaint.
Good cause appearing therefore, it is hereby ordered that the Stipulation is

5

GRANTED. Plaintiff shall have leave to file the Second Amended Complaint and

6

Defendant shall have thirty (30) days from the date of entry of this Order to answer or

7

otherwise respond, subject to all the understandings and limitations set out in the parties’

8

Stipulation.

9
IT IS SO ORDERED.

S

J

ER

H

18

RT

17

. Breyer

arles R
udge Ch

NO

16

19

R NIA

15

LI

14

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA
___________________________________
Honorable Charles R. DERED
Breyer
United States District Judge
SO OR
IT IS

RT
U
O

13

DATED: _______, 2012
Oct. 25

UNIT
ED

12

FO

11

A

10

N

F
D IS T IC T O
R

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-1STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR LEAVE TO
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT (CASE NO. 3:11-CV-06669)

C