Ian McCray v. Unite Here! Local 19

Filing 24

ORDER DENYING 21 DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO FILE RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS. Signed by Judge Beth Labson Freeman. (blflc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/3/2016)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

5

SAN JOSE DIVISION

6
7

IAN MCCRAY,

Case No. 16-cv-01233-BLF

Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
10

UNITE HERE! LOCAL 19,
Defendant.

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S
REQUEST TO FILE RESPONSE TO
PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS
[Re: ECF 21]

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

Defendant seeks leave to respond to Plaintiff’s objections to Defendant’s Supplemental

14

Request for Judicial Notice, filed with Defendant’s Reply in support of its Motion to Dismiss.

15

ECF 21. Defendant contends that the objections raise two new legal arguments: (1) that the Court

16

may only look to ordinances and official acts that existed at the time the Union and the Employer

17

negotiated a waiver to the San Jose Minimum Wage Ordinance in determining whether the

18

Union’s conduct violated the duty of fair representation, and (2) that the Court may not look to

19

officials’ interpretations in determining whether the Union’s similar interpretation violated the

20

duty of fair representation. Id. at 2. The former concerns relevance—a determination the Court is

21

prepared to make without further argument—while the latter was, in fact, raised in Plaintiff’s

22

opposition. See ECF 16 at 20. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Defendant’s request.

23

IT IS SO ORDERED.

24
25
26
27
28

Dated: June 3, 2016
______________________________________
BETH LABSON FREEMAN
United States District Judge