Bricklayers Local No. 3 Pension Trust and its Board of Trustees et al v. Xu

Filing 18

ORDER GRANTING 17 MOTION to Continue Case Management Conference. Case Management Statement due by 6/20/2014. Case Management Conference set for 6/27/2014 11:00 AM in Courtroom 5, 2nd Floor, Oakland.. Signed by Judge JEFFREY S. WHITE on 4/21/14. (jjoS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/21/2014)

Download PDF
1 Muriel B. Kaplan, Esq. (SBN 124607) Erica J. Russell, Esq. (SBN 274494) 2 SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAW CORPORATION 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2110 3 San Francisco, CA 94104 (415) 882-7900 4 (415) 882-9287 – Facsimile mkaplan@sjlawcorp.com 5 erussell@sjlawcorp.com 6 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 BRICKLAYERS LOCAL NO. 3 PENSION 10 TRUST, et al., Plaintiffs, 11 12 v. 13 DONGHUA XU, individually and dba UNITED TILE & MARBLE CO., 14 Defendant. 15 Case No.: C13-4593 JSW PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON Date: Time: Location: Courtroom: Judge: April 25, 2014 11:00 a.m. 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, CA 11, 19th Floor Honorable Jeffrey S. White 16 17 Plaintiffs herein respectfully submit this Request to Continue the Case Management 18 Conference, currently scheduled for April 25, 2014, for approximately sixty (60) days. Good cause 19 exists for the granting of the continuance as follows: 20 1. As the Court’s records will reflect, this action was filed on October 4, 2013 to 21 compel Defendant to comply with the terms of his Collective Bargaining Agreement. 22 2. Plaintiffs served the Complaint, Summons, and related court documents on 23 Defendant on November 4, 2013. Defendant failed to file an Answer to the Complaint and 24 Plaintiffs requested Entry of Default, which was entered by the court on December 12, 2013. 25 3. An audit of Defendant’s payroll records for the time period from October 1, 2008 26 through March 31, 2013 showed that Defendant failed to report and pay required contributions for 27 several of his employees in the years 2008 and 2009. Defendant provided documentation, namely 28 W-2 forms, to dispute the amounts found due to Plaintiffs from the audit of his records. Plaintiffs’ -1PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON Case No.: C13-4593 JSW P:\CLIENTS\BRICL\United Tile and Marble\Pleadings\Request to Continue CMC 4-18-14.doc 1 auditor reviewed the documentation provided by Defendant and revised the amounts due on the 2 audit where required. 4. 3 The revised audit report showed that Defendant still owed approximately $306.00 4 for contributions for work performed by one (1) employee in 2008 and approximately $4,340.00 5 for contributions for work performed by two (2) employees in 2009, plus liquidated damages and 6 interest on the unpaid contributions, attorneys’ fees and costs, and audit fees. 5. 7 Defendant provided further documentation to Plaintiffs to dispute the remaining 8 amounts owed on the audit, specifically for the unreported hours worked by two (2) of 9 Defendant’s employees in 2009. Defendant provided signed statements from the two (2) 10 employees which claimed that, during the time they worked for Defendant in 2009, they only 11 performed 152 hours of work that was covered by the Collective Bargaining Agreement. The two 12 (2) statements further claimed that the unreported hours showing as due on the audit were spent 13 performing home remodel work on Defendant’s personal residence and did not involve any work 14 covered by the Collective Bargaining Agreement. 6. 15 Since the statements from Defendant’s two (2) employees were not signed under 16 penalty of perjury or notarized, Plaintiffs prepared declarations that restated the claims set forth in 17 the employees’ signed statements for the two (2) employees to sign and have notarized. Plaintiffs 18 are currently awaiting receipt of the signed and notarized declarations. Once Plaintiffs receive the 19 declarations, Plaintiffs will continue to attempt to resolve this matter informally with Defendant 20 for the remaining amounts owed on the audit. Should the parties fail to reach an informal 21 resolution of this matter, Plaintiffs anticipate filing a motion for default judgment against 22 Defendant. 23 / / / 24 / / / 25 / / / 26 / / / 27 / / / 28 / / / -2PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON Case No.: C13-4593 JSW P:\CLIENTS\BRICL\United Tile and Marble\Pleadings\Request to Continue CMC 4-18-14.doc 1 7. Based on the above, there are no issues that need to be addressed by the parties at 2 the currently scheduled Case Management Conference. In the interest of conserving costs as well 3 as the Court’s time and resources, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Case Management 4 Conference scheduled for April 25, 2014 be continued for approximately sixty (60) days to allow 5 sufficient time for the parties to reach an informal resolution of this matter. 6 I declare under penalty of perjury that I am the attorney for the Plaintiffs in the above 7 entitled action, and that the foregoing is true of my own knowledge. 8 Executed this 18th day of April 2014, at San Francisco, California. SALTZMAN & JOHNSON LAW CORPORATION 9 10 By: 11 12 /S/ Erica J. Russell Attorneys for Plaintiffs IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 14 15 16 17 18 The currently set initial Case Management Conference is hereby continued to 11:00 a.m. June 27, 2014 __________________________ at __________________, and all previously set deadlines and dates related to this case are continued accordingly. April 21, 2014 Date: ____________________ _________________________________________ HONORABLE JEFFREY S. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST TO CONTINUE CMC; [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON Case No.: C13-4593 JSW P:\CLIENTS\BRICL\United Tile and Marble\Pleadings\Request to Continue CMC 4-18-14.doc

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?