Sanchez v. Aerogroup Retail Holdings, Inc et al

Filing 30

Order by Hon. Lucy H. Koh granting 29 Stipulation.(lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/14/2012)

Case5:12-cv-05445-LHK Document29 Filed12/13/12 Page1 of 4

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

SCHIFF HARDIN LLP
William J. Carroll (CA SBN 118106)
[e-mail]
Sarah D. Youngblood (CA SBN 244304)
[e-mail]
One Market, Spear Street Tower
Thirty-Second Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Michael T. Chin (CA SBN 259466)
[e-mail]
233 S. Wacker Dr., Suite 6600
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
AEROGROUP RETAIL HOLDINGS, INC.

12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14

SAN JOSE DIVISION

15
16
17

JESSICA SANCHEZ, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly
situated,
Plaintiff,

18
19
20
21
22

v.
AEROGROUP RETAIL
HOLDINGS, INC., Delaware
Corporation doing business in
California; and DOES 1-50,
Defendants.

Case No. CV12-05445 LHK
STIPULATION TO ALLOW
DEFENDANT TO FILE LIMITED
SURREPLY; [PROPOSED] ORDER
Date:
Time:
Courtroom:

Mar. 7, 2013
1:30 p.m.
8

First Amended Complaint Filed:
Sept. 20, 2012

23
24
25
26
27
28
S CHIFF H ARDIN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

Case No. CV12-05445 LHK
STIPULATION TO ALLOW DEFENDANT TO FILE LIMITED SURREPLY; [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case5:12-cv-05445-LHK Document29 Filed12/13/12 Page2 of 4

1

WHEREAS, on November 19, 2012, plaintiff Jessica Sanchez (“Plaintiff”)

2

filed a Motion to Remand [Dkt Nos. 14-17] (“Motion”), in which Plaintiff argued

3

that the instant action should be remanded to California Superior Court because her

4

“original Complaint put Defendant on notice that the amount in controversy was

5

over $75,000.00 just with Plaintiff’s claims under California Labor Code Section

6

1197.1 alone, without the additional claims in the Complaint” (Motion at 4);

7

WHEREAS, on December 3, 2012, defendant Aerogroup Retail Holdings,

8

Inc. (“Defendant”) filed an Opposition to Motion to Remand [Dkt. 22]

9

(“Opposition”), in which Defendant argued that Plaintiff’s Motion should fail

10

because penalties under Labor Code section 1197.1 cannot be aggregated for

11

purposes of calculating the amount in controversy;

12

WHEREAS, on December 10, 2012, Plaintiff filed a Reply in Support of

13

Plaintiff’s Motion to Remand [Dkt. 24] (“Reply”), in which Plaintiff asserted the

14

argument that the time for removal of this action was triggered as a result of notice

15

to Defendant concerning the potential or impending assertion of a claim under

16

California’s Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“PAGA”), prior to the filing of

17

Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint;

18
19

WHEREAS, it is Defendant’s position that a limited surreply is necessary to
address Plaintiff’s PAGA argument;

20

WHEREAS, Plaintiff does not object to the Court granting leave to

21

Defendant to file the proposed surreply;

22

///

23

///

24

///

25

///

26

///

27

///

28

///

S CHIFF H ARDIN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

1

Case No. CV12-05445 LHK

STIPULATION TO ALLOW DEFENDANT TO FILE LIMITED SURREPLY; [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case5:12-cv-05445-LHK Document29 Filed12/13/12 Page3 of 4

1

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between Plaintiff

2

Jessica Sanchez and Defendant Aerogroup Retail Holdings, Inc., by and through

3

their respective counsel of record, that Defendant be granted leave to file the

4

proposed surreply.

5

SO STIPULATED.

6
7

Dated: December 13, 2012

SCHIFF HARDIN LLP

8
By:

9
10
11

/s/ Michael T. Chin
Michael T. Chin
Attorneys for Defendant
AEROGROUP RETAIL
HOLDINGS, INC.

12
13

Dated: December 13, 2012

LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT A. MILLER

14
By:

15
16

/s/ Kelly A. Buschman
Kelly A. Buschman (with permission)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
JESSICA SANCHEZ

17
18
GENERAL ORDER NO. 45(X) CERTIFICATION

19
20
21

I attest that I have obtained Kelly A. Buschman’s concurrence in the filing of
this document.

22
23
24

/s/ Michael T. Chin
Michael T. Chin

25
26
27
28
S CHIFF H ARDIN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

-2-

Case No. CV12-05445 LHK

STIPULATION TO ALLOW DEFENDANT TO FILE LIMITED SURREPLY; [PROPOSED] ORDER

Case5:12-cv-05445-LHK Document29 Filed12/13/12 Page4 of 4

1
2
3

[PROPOSED] ORDER
Defendant is hereby granted permission to file aIS SO ORDERED.
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT one page surreply, which shall be filed by
December 17, 2012. The parties are advised that future requests to file surreplies are disfavored
and are likely to be denied.

4
5
6
7
8
9

Dated: December 14, 2012
__________________

10

_________________________________
Honorable Lucy H. Koh
U.S. District Court Judge

11
12
13
14

34070-0011
SF\320495124.2

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
S CHIFF H ARDIN LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
SAN FRANCISCO

-3-

Case No. CV12-05445 LHK

STIPULATION TO ALLOW DEFENDANT TO FILE LIMITED SURREPLY; [PROPOSED] ORDER