Austin et al v. Foodliner, Inc.

Filing 22

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. Granting 21 Stipulation Regarding Filing of First Amended Complaint. (ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/17/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

HUNTER PYLE (SBN 191125)
CHAD SAUNDERS (SBN 257810)
HUNTER PYLE LAW
428 Thirteenth Street, Eleventh Floor
Oakland, California 94612
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Emails: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs RONDA AUSTIN,
CHRISTOPHER CORDUCK, ERNEST DIAL,
BILLY WAYNE GIBSON and BOBBY G. SMITH
MOLLIE M. BURKS (SBN 222112)
NICHOLAS A. DEMING (SBN 287917)
GORDON & REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI LLP
275 Battery Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Emails: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
FOODLINER, INC.

14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

15

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
16

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

17
18
19
20

RONDA AUSTIN, CHRISTOPHER
CORDUCK, ERNEST DIAL, BILLY
WAYNE GIBSON, and BOBBY G. SMITH,
on behalf of themselves and others similarly
situated;

21
22
23
24

Case No. 4:16-cv-07185-HSG
STIPULATION REGARDING FILING
OF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs,
vs.
FOODLINER, INC.,
Defendant.

25
26
27
28
STIPULATION RE FILING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Case No. 4:16-cv-07185-HSG
0

1

Plaintiffs RONDA AUSTIN, CHRISTOPHER CORDUCK, ERNEST DIAL, BILLY

2

WAYNE GIBSON, and BOBBY G. SMITH (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendant FOODLINER, INC.

3

(“Defendant” or “FOODLINER”) (together with Plaintiffs, “the Parties”) hereby submit the

4

following stipulation and proposed order for Plaintiffs to file a first amended complaint.

5
6

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed their initial complaint in Alameda County Superior Court
on November 3, 2016;

7

WHEREAS, Defendant answered the complaint on December 13, 2016;

8

WHEREAS, Defendant removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern

9

District of California on December 16, 2016;

10

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed a complaint in Alameda County Superior Court alleging

11

violations of the California Labor Code pursuant to the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004

12

(“PAGA”) on January 18, 2017 (“PAGA action”);

13

WHEREAS, the Parties met and conferred through counsel and agreed to attempt to

14

settle both actions through private mediation before Mark Rudy, Esq., which took place on

15

August 16, 2017;

16

WHEREAS, after the unsuccessful mediation, counsel for the Parties met and conferred

17

regarding the PAGA action and Plaintiffs’ intention to file an amended complaint in this action.

18

As a result of those discussions, Plaintiffs now seek to file a First Amended Complaint in order

19

to conform to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and to add the claims in the PAGA action to

20

this action;

21
22
23
24

WHEREAS, Defendant agrees to the filing of the proposed First Amended Complaint,
which is attached hereto as Exhibit A;
WHEREAS, Defendant agrees that the PAGA claims in the First Amended Complaint
will relate back to the filing of the PAGA action on January 18, 2017; and

25

WHEREAS, the Parties agree that Defendant’s stipulation to allow the filing of the

26

proposed First Amended Complaint will not serve to waive any defenses or objections, except as

27
28
STIPULATION RE FILING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Case No. 4:16-cv-07185-HSG
1

1

regards the statute of limitations for the PAGA claims, to any of the causes of action, or to the

2

First Amended Complaint, and without admitting anything contained therein to be true.

3
4
5
6

Based on the foregoing, the Parties, by and through their counsel of record and subject to
this Court’s approval, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
1. Plaintiffs shall have leave to file the First Amended Complaint attached hereto as
Exhibit A;

7

2. Defendant’s counsel will accept service of the First Amended Complaint;

8

3. Defendant reserves all rights, defenses, and objections to the claims set forth in

9
10
11
12
13

Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint, except as regards the statute of limitations for
the PAGA claims; and
4. Defendant will have thirty (30) days after their counsel is served with the First
Amended Complaint to file a responsive pleading.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.

14
15

DATED: October 16, 2017

16

By:_/s/ Chad Saunders________________
Hunter Pyle
Chad Saunders

17
18

Attorneys for Plaintiffs RONDA AUSTIN,
CHRISTOPHER CORDUCK, ERNEST
DIAL, BILLY WAYNE GIBSON and
BOBBY G. SMITH

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

HUNTER PYLE LAW

DATED: October 16, 2017

GORDON & REES SCULLY
MANSUKHANI LLP
By:_/s/ Nicholas A. Deming____________
Mollie M. Burks
Nicholas A. Deming
Attorneys for Defendant
FOODLINER, INC.

27
28
STIPULATION RE FILING FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Case No. 4:16-cv-07185-HSG
2

1

IT IS SO ORDE
I
ERED.

2

Dat
ted: October 17, 2017

3
4

_________
__________
___________
_____
Hon. Hayw
wood S. Gill
liam, Jr.

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIP
PULATION RE FILING FIR AMENDE COMPLAI
R
RST
ED
INT

Case N 4:16-cv-07
No.
7185-HSG
3