Malone v. KAG WEST, LLC
Filing
24
JOINT STIPULATION AND ORDER [*AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT*] TO REMAND CONSOLIDATED ACTION TO ALAMEDA SUPERIOR COURT AND VACATING COMPLIANCE HEARING. This consolidated action is ordered remanded back to Alameda County Superior Court under the docket Patrick Malone v KAG West, LLC, Case No. RG15784137. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 7/17/18. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/17/2018)
1
2
3
ALEXANDER KRAKOW + GLICK LLP
Michael S. Morrison (State Bar No. 205320)
401 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1000
Santa Monica, California 90401
T: 310 394 0888 | F: 310 394 0811
E: mmorrison@akgllp.com
4
5
6
Attorneys for Plaintiff and Respondent PATRICK
MALONE
(Additional Counsel Listed on Following Page)
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
13
14
KAG WEST, LLC, a California
limited liability company; THE
KENAN ADVANTAGE GROUP,
INC., a Delaware corporation,
Petitioners,
Case No. 4:15-cv-03827-YGR
Case No. 4:15-cv-04262-YGR
(Assigned to the Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez
Rogers)
15
v.
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
PATRICK MALONE, an individual,
Respondent.
JOINT STIPULATION AND
[PROPOSED] ORDER TO REMAND
ACTION TO ALAMEDA COUNTY
SUPERIOR COURT; VACATING
COMPLIANCE HEARING
*as modified by the Court*
PATRICK MALONE, an individual,
on behalf of himself, all others
similarly situated, and the general
public,
Plaintiff,
23
24
25
26
27
v.
KAG WEST, LLC, a California
limited liability company,
Defendant.
28
-iJOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO REMAND ACTION TO ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
Case No. 4:15-cv-03827-YGR
Case No. 4:15-cv-04262-YGR
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS W. FALVEY
THOMAS W. FALVEY, SBN 65744
MICHAEL H. BOYAMIAN, SBN 256107
ARMAND R. KIZIRIAN, SBN 293992
550 N. Brand Blvd., Suite 1500
Glendale, California 91203
T: (818) 547-5200 | F: (818) 500-9307
Attorneys for Respondent and Plaintiff PATRICK
MALONE
BRIAN L. JOHNSRUD, State Bar No. 184474
VICTORIA R. CARRADERO, State Bar No. 217885
STEPHEN N. YANG, State Bar No. 142474
CURLEY, HURTGEN & JOHNSRUD LLP
4400 Bohannon Drive, Suite 230
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Telephone: 650.600.5300
Facsimile: 650.323.1002
E-mail: bjohnsrud@chjllp.com
vcarradero@chjllp.com
syang@chjllp.com
Attorneys for Defendants and Petitioners KAG
WEST, LLC and THE KENAN ADVANTAGE
GROUP, INC.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- ii JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO REMAND ACTION TO ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
Case No. 4:15-cv-03827-YGR
Case No. 4:15-cv-04262-YGR
1
This Joint Stipulation to Remand Action to Alameda County Superior Court
2
is made and entered into by and between Plaintiff and Respondent Patrick Malone,
3
individually and on behalf of the general public, and Defendants and Petitioners
4
KAG West, LLC and The Kenan Advantage Group, Inc. (“Defendants-Petitioners”)
5
(the “Parties”).
6
WHEREAS, the action of KAG West, LLC, et al. v. Patrick Malone,
7
Northern District of California Case No. 4:15-cv-03827-YGR was initiated by
8
Defendants-Petitioners on August 21, 2015 in the form of a Petition to Compel
9
Arbitration against Plaintiff-Respondent Patrick Malone for the various wage and
10
hour claims he had asserted in correspondence dated July 22, 2015 (“District Court
11
Action”);
12
WHEREAS, the alleged putative wage and hour class action and Private
13
Attorney General Act (“PAGA”) action of Patrick Malone v. KAG West, LLC,
14
Alameda County Superior Court Case No. RG15784137 was filed by Plaintiff-
15
Respondent in California Superior Court on September 1, 2015 (“California
16
Superior Court Action”);
17
WHEREAS, Defendants-Petitioners removed the California Superior Court
18
Action to the Northern District of California on September 18, 2015 (“Removed
19
California Superior Court Action”);
20
WHEREAS, District Court Judge Thelton E. Henderson (Ret.) granted
21
Defendants-Petitioners’ Petition to Compel Arbitration in the District Court Action
22
on November 3, 2015, correspondingly stayed Plaintiff Malone’s PAGA
23
representative claims and consolidated the District Court Action and the Removed
24
California Superior Court Action -;
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, Plaintiff and Respondent Malone’s putative class claims were
subsequently dismissed by a JAMS arbitrator;
WHEREAS, in addition to the consolidated action in federal court for claims
brought forth by Mr. Malone, a representative PAGA suit initiated by an individual
-1JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO REMAND ACTION TO ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
Case No. 4:15-cv-03827-YGR
Case No. 4:15-cv-04262-YGR
1
named James Souza remains pending in Alameda County Superior Court under the
2
title of James Souza v. KAG West, LLC, Case No. RG16814354. Mr. Souza is
3
represented by the same counsel of record in this action;
4
WHEREAS, the Souza v. KAG West action, as a PAGA only action, could
5
not be removed to the Northern District of California from Alameda County
6
Superior Court as currently pled and remains pending there;
7
WHEREAS, the Parties in this consolidated action, along with Plaintiff
8
James Souza in James Souza v. KAG West, LLC, Case No. RG16814354, have
9
reached a global settlement of their wage and hour claims against Defendants-
10
11
Petitioners that is subject to court review and approval;
WHEREAS, this global settlement, if approved, would resolve all claims
12
alleged in this consolidated action, in Malone’s individual action pending in
13
arbitration before JAMS, and in the Alameda County Superior Court Souza PAGA
14
action;
15
16
17
18
19
WHEREAS, the Parties believe it would be most efficient to have a single
court consider their global settlement;
WHEREAS, it is in the interests of judicial economy to have a single court
consider the global settlement reached by the Parties;
WHEREAS, the present consolidated federal court action could be
20
remanded from the Northern District of California back to state court based on the
21
original filing of the Malone v. KAG West California Superior Court Action in
22
Alameda County Superior Court;
23
24
25
IT IS THEREFORE AGREED BETWEEN THE PARTIES BY AND
THROUGH THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD THAT:
1.
For the sole purpose of facilitating state court review and potential
26
approval of the Parties’ global settlement of all disputed claims between the Parties,
27
this consolidated action shall be remanded back to Alameda County Superior Court
28
under the docket Patrick Malone v. KAG West, LLC, Case No. RG15784137.
-2JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO REMAND ACTION TO ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
Case No. 4:15-cv-03827-YGR
Case No. 4:15-cv-04262-YGR
1
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
2
3
Dated:
July 17, 2018
4
LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS W.
FALVEY
ALEXANDER KRAKOW + GLICK, LLP
5
6
By: s/Michael Morrison
Thomas W. Falvey
Michael H. Boyamian
Armand R. Kizirian
Michael S. Morrison
Attorney for Respondent
PATRICK MALONE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Dated:
July 17, 2018
CURLEY HESSINGER & JOHNSRUD
LLP
14
15
16
17
18
19
By: s/ Stephen Yang
Brian Lee Johnsrud
Victoria R. Carradero
Stephen Yang
Attorney for Petitioners
KAG WEST, LLC and THE KENAN
ADVANTAGE GROUP
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-3JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO REMAND ACTION TO ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
Case No. 4:15-cv-03827-YGR
Case No. 4:15-cv-04262-YGR
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER
2
3
4
5
6
Having reviewed the Parties’ Joint Stipulation to Remand Action to Alameda
County Superior Court, and good cause appearing, the Court hereby rules as
follows:
1.
This consolidated action is ORDERED remanded back to Alameda
7
County Superior Court under the docket Patrick Malone v. KAG West, LLC, Case
8
No. RG15784137.
9
2.
The compliance hearing set for July 20, 2018 is hereby VACATED.
10
11
The Clerk shall close the file.
12
13
14
Dated: July 17, 2018
By:
15
Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers
United States District Court Judge
Northern District of California
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4-
JOINT STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO REMAND ACTION TO ALAMEDA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
Case No. 4:15-cv-03827-YGR
Case No. 4:15-cv-04262-YGR
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?