Ser Lao v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz, L.P.

Filing 22

ORDER GRANTING #21 Stipulation re Tran Class Action Settlement filed by Ser Lao. Signed by Judge Edward J. Davila on 2/24/2016. (ecg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/24/2016)

7

Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class
(Additional Counsel on Next Page)

R NIA

. D av i l a

FO

J

w a rd J
u d ge E d

A

E R DATED: 2/24/2016 C
N
F
D IS T IC T O
R

H

6

RT

5

NO

4

TED

GRAN

LI

S
3

UNIT
ED

2

Larry W. Lee (State Bar No. 228175)
[e-mail]
Nicholas Rosenthal (State Bar No. 268297)
[e-mail]
DIVERSITY LAW GROUP, P.C.
550 South Hope Street, Suite 2655
Los Angeles, CA 90071
[phone]
[phone] facsimile

RT
U
O

1

S DISTRICT
TE
C
TA

8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12

SER LAO, as an individual and on behalf
of all others similarly situated,

13
14

Case No. 5:16-cv-333 EJD
STIPULATION REGARDING TRAN CLASS
ACTION SETTLEMENT

Plaintiffs,
vs.

16

H & M HENNES & MAURITZ, L.P., a
New York limited partnership; and DOES
1 through 50, inclusive,

17

Defendants.

15

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1
STIPULATION REGARDING TRAN CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

1
2
3
4

WILLIAM L. MARDER, ESQ. (CBN 170131)
Polaris Law Group LLP
501 San Benito Street, Suite 200
Hollister, CA 95023
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]

5
6
7
8
9

Dennis S. Hyun (State Bar No. 224240)
[e-mail]
HYUN LEGAL, APC
550 South Hope Street, Suite 2655
Los Angeles, CA 90071
[phone]
[phone] facsimile

10

Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class

11

MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP
ROBERT H. PLATT (Bar No. CA 108533)
[e-mail]
ANDREW L. SATENBERG (Bar No. CA 174840)
[e-mail]
EVE L. TORRES (Bar No. CA 303651)
[e-mail]
11355 West Olympic Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90064-1614
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

12
13
14
15
16
17
18

Attorneys for Defendant
H&M HENNES & MAURITZ, L.P.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2
STIPULATION REGARDING TRAN CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

1

Plaintiff Ser Lao (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant H & M Hennes & Mauritz, L.P.

2

(“Defendant”) (Plaintiff and Defendant collectively referred to as the “Parties”), by and through

3

their counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows with reference to the following facts:

4

1.

WHEREAS, on or about December 23, 2011, Plaintiff Suzanne Tran (“Tran”)

5

filed the class action lawsuit entitled, Tran v. H & M Hennes & Mauritz, L.P., Case No.

6

111CV215599 (the “Tran Case”);

7

2.

WHEREAS, on or about December 11, 2015, Plaintiff filed his class action

8

lawsuit against Defendant in the Santa Clara County Superior Court, Case No. 15CV288944 (the

9

“Lao Case”);

10
11
12
13
14
15

3.

WHEREAS, on or about January 21, 2016, Defendant removed the above-

captioned case to the United States District Court, resulting in assignment of this action before
this Court;
4.

WHEREAS, Tran and Defendant entered into a class action settlement for the

claims asserted in the Tran Case and, on or about February 2, 2016, Tran filed a Motion for
Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement; and

16
5.

WHEREAS, pursuant to meet and confer discussions of the Parties, they agree

17
18
19
20
21
22

that the Tran class action settlement does not apply to Plaintiff and putative class members’
claims for (1) unpaid wages/overtime under California Labor Code Sections 510, 558, 1194,
1197, and 1197.1 that resulted from alleged security checks; (2) premium pay for missed meal
and rest periods under California Labor Code Sections 226.7 and 512, that resulted from alleged
security checks; and (3) unpaid overtime under California Labor Code Sections 510, 558, 1194,

23

and 1197.1 that resulted from Defendant’s alleged failure to include all non-discretionary items

24

of compensation in the regular rate for the purposes of calculating overtime.

25

NOW, THEREFOR, the Parties in the Lao Case hereby stipulate as follows:

26

1.

The class action settlement in the Tran Case shall not apply to bar Plaintiff and

27

putative class members’ claims for (1) unpaid wages/overtime under California Labor Code

28

Sections 510, 558, 1194, 1197, and 1197.1 that resulted from alleged security checks; (2)

3
STIPULATION REGARDING TRAN CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

1

premium pay for missed meal and rest periods under California Labor Code Sections 226.7 and

2

512 that resulted from alleged security checks; and (3) unpaid overtime under California Labor

3

Code Sections 510, 558, 1194, and 1197.1 that resulted from Defendant’s alleged miscalculation

4

of the regular rate of pay based on Defendant’s alleged failure to include in the regular rate all

5

non-discretionary remuneration and/or incentive pay, including without limitation, quarterly

6

and/or monthly bonuses.

7
8

IT IS SO STIPULATED.
DATED: February 22, 2016

DIVERSITY LAW GROUP, P.C.

9
10

By:

/s/ Larry W. Lee
Larry W. Lee
Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class

11
12
13
14

DATED: February 22, 2016

MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP

15
By:

/s/ Andrew L. Satenberg
Andrew L. Satenberg
Attorneys for Defendant
H&M HENNES & MAURITZ, L.P.

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

316320376.1

28

4
STIPULATION REGARDING TRAN CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT