11 Plaintiffs - FindForms.com

Transcription

Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6
1
John Swenson (SBN 224110)
2
2121 Avenue of the Stars
Suite 2800
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Phone: 310.734.3200
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 1 of 2
STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP
3
4
Fax: 310.734.3300
Email: jswenson(£steptoe.com
5
Attorneys for Defendant Red Door Salons, Inc.
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9 LISA KNIGHT and MARCIE DAVE, on )
of themselves and all others similarly )
10behalfsituated,
)
Case No. 3:08-cv-01520-SC
11 Plaintiffs,)
12 vs. )
)
(San Francisco County Superior Court
Case No. CGC-08-471683)
)
CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE OF
NOTICE OF REMOVAL ON
PARTIES IN STATE COURT
)
13 RED DOOR SALONS, INC., an Arzona )
Corporation and DOES 1 through 25, )
14 inclusive, )
15 Defendants.))
Action Filed: January 31, 2008
)
16
I, Maria Rodriguez, hereby certify and declare as follows:
17
18
19
I am over the age of 18 years and not a party to this action.
2.
My business address is 2121 Avenue of
the Stars, Suite 2800, Los Angeles, California
90067.
20
21
1.
3. On March 20, 2008, I caused to be personally served upon Plaintiffs' counsel in this
case, Gary E. Moss of the Law Offices of Moss & Hough, and Michael Von Loewenfeldt of the
22
Law Offices of
23
United States Distrct Cour for the Northern District of
24
Notice of
25
of California, which was filed with the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of
26
San Francisco on March 20,2008; and (c) the Notice of Assignent to United States Magistrate,
27
the Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference and ADR deadlines, Standing Order for
28
CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF REMOVAL ON PARTIES IN STATE COURT
Removal, which was filed with the
Kerr & Wagstaffe, LLP: (a) the Notice of
filing of
California on March 19,2008; (b) the
Removal of Action to the United States District Cour for the Northern District
1
(No.3:08-cv-01520-SC) 553413
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
All Judges of
Document 6
the Northern District of
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 2 of 2
California re: Contents of Joint Case Management
Statement, and form allowing a party to consent to assignent of the case to a Magistrate Judge.
True and correct copies of
the Notice of
Filing Notice of
Removal, Notice of
Removal, the
Court's Order Setting Initial Case Management Conference and ADR Deadlines, along with all
Court-issued documents served on counsel is attached hereto as Exhibit" 1."
I certify and declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of
America and of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
l'
8
9
DATED: March 31,2008
By: Maria Rodriguez
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2
28 CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE OF NOTICE OF REMOVAL ON PARTIES IN STATE COURT
(No.3:08-cv-01520-SC) 553413
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
03/20/200
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
Page 1 of 74
4')61331
,À ~
'o/~,~ 'l
JoJi Swenson (SBN 224 i i 0)
o /i~':'í;;';:-C~' e
the Sta, 28th Floor
2 2121 Avenue of
~.Jj~ .OJ:
'):'1/r:;
D .t.:';..
'or.
'rI)
.Y. G
',0n
'" n.
'- VA,
." ?"'f.r
.l.r,..
Los Angeles, Calforna 9007
3 Telephone: 310.734.3200
--'-:" ~ V ,Q . 0;.. '0,.
Facsimile: 310.732.3300
"-;:
='l-) ,. ()
Coi:
"'4,.
/'.....-, ....1..:. .1'/1
4 Email: jswenson(gsteptoe.com
'1.. ~
:;¡', 'r¿
5 Attorneys for Defendant Red Door Salons, Inc.
~v. " -Ì'lf
6
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
7
~Cl~.
I.r.\
IN AND FOR TIE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
8
(UNLIMITED JURISDICTION)
9 LISA KNIGHT and MARCIE DAVE, on )
situated, )
CLS ACTION
;..,\ "fI.X
i 0 behalf of themselves and all other similarly )
11
12
13
Plaintiffs,
)
)
vs.
)
)
)
RED DOOR SALONS, INC., an Arzona
)
. 14 Corpration and DOES 1 through 25,
inclusive,
15
Defendants.
16
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
17
Case No. CGC-08-47l683
DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF FILING
NOTICE OF REMOVAL
Case Mangement Conference Set
Date: July 3,2008
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Dept.: 212
Action Filed: Januay 31, 2008
Trial Date: Not Set
18 TO THE SUPERIOR COURT OF TIE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN
19 FRANCISCO, AND TO THE PLAINIFFS LISA KNIGHT AND MARCIE DAVE AND
20 THEIR COUNSELS OR RECORD:
21
PLEASE TAK NOTICE that Notice of Removal in this action has been filed in the
22 United States Distrct Cowt for the Nortern Distrct of California, on or about March i 9, 2008,
23 beang United States Distrct Cour Case No. CV 08-1520 puruant to U.S.C. Section 1332 and
this removal is hereby provided puruant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1446(d). A
1441, and notice of
24
25 tre copy of the Notice of Removal, includin attached Exhibits A through F, Corporate
Interested Pares, are attched hereto as Exhibit "1."
26 Disclosure Statement and Certification of
27
28
DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL
EXHIBIT 1.
552036
Exhbit "1"
Page 3
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20/200'
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
Page 2 of 74
4' '161331
DATED: March 20, 2008.
2
3
4
5
By
Jo
Alto
RED
so
or Defendant
RS SALONS, INC.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF FD.ING NOTICE OF REMOVAL
552036
Exhbit "1"
Page 4
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/201200f
Document
6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 3 of 74
41 ~6133l
FIRST LEGAL
°8 i
./
¡:~'¥'!l.
~Olli!;;ù~
CL1~'w.9lAb
/008
I1A/t J
2
the Sta
2121 Avenue of
"" D/, .1: r¡~$oAl_
~iè;'llc1'
Çö
Qc CAi Ji~"
Suite 2800
3
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Phone: 310.734.3200
4
Fax: 310.734.3300
i.
..ruFlNl
EmaiJ: jswenson~steptoe.com
5
I
Attorneys for Defendant Rec Door Salons, Inc.
6
7
8
9
10
l2'fi/íJ)9
situted, ) v- . . i ~
1446 ~
LISA KNIGHT and MARCIE DAVE, on ).
b.ehalfofthemselves and all others similarly ) _NO. n 0 15 Q '0
) (San Francisco County Superor Court '
11
Plaintiff,
) Case No. CGC..8-471683)
)
12
vs.
)
)
13
RED DOOR SALONS, INC., an Arzona
)
Corpraon and DOES 1 thugh 25,
)
14
inclusive,
)
) . (DIVRSITY & CLASS ACTION
.15
Defendants.
16
NOTICE OF REOVAL PURSUA T ~r.
TO 28 U.S.C. §§'1332(a), (d), 1441 d l-
~~
tJ\¡
r~
) FAISS ACT)
I))
)
F?.1
~ Action Filed:' Janua 31,2008
~
17
TO THE CLERK OF THE ABOVE~ENTITLED COURT AN PLAIIFFS AND THEIR
18
A TIORNYS OF RECORD: .
'19
21 'I! '
20
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendat Red Door Salons, Inc. ("Defendant" or "Red.
Door") hereby removes ths action frm the Supor Court of the State of Californa for the
22
County of San Fracisco to the United States Distct Court for the Northern Distrct 'of Californa,
pursuant to 28 V.S.C. §§ I
332(a), (d), 1441 and 144. A short plain statement of
23
24
the grounds for
removal follows:
STATEMENT OF JUSDICTION
25
26
27
28
.
1.
This Cour has original
jursdiction over ths action under: 1) 28 V.S.C. § 1332(a)
(diversity jursdiction); and 2) 28 V.S.C. § 1332(d) (The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005
~o. )
. NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO FEDERA COURT
552038
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 5
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/201200f
Document
6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 4 of 74
FIRST LEGAL
4' "'61331
1 ("CAP A")). 28 U .S.C. § 1332(a) grts distrct courts original jurisdiction over civil actions
2 between citizens of different sttes and the amount in contrvery exceeds the sum of $75,000,
3 exclusive of interest and costs. The CAFA grants distrct courts original jurisdiction over civil
4 class actions filed under feder or state law in which any member of a class of plaintiffs is a
5 citizen of a state different from any defendat and where the amount in contrvery for the
6 putative class members in the aggregate exce the sum or value of $5,00,00, exclusive of
7 interests and costs. As set forth below, this cae meets all of the requirement for removal under
this
8 both 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) and the CAPA and is timely and propely removed by the filing of
9 Notice.
10 INISTRICT ASSIGNMENT
2.
11
Assigrent to the San Francisco division of
the United States Distrct Cour for the
12 Nortern Distrct of Californa is appropriate becuse ths is a civil action which arses in the
San Francisco, Cafornia. See Civil L.R. 3~2(d); 3~5(b).
13 County of
14 PLEADINGS. PROCESS. AN ORDERS
On or about Janua 31, 2008, Plaintiffs fied a Class Action Complaint against
3.
15
i 6 Defendant in the Supeor Cour of the State of Californa for the County of San Fracisco,
17 entitled Lisa Knight. et at. v. Red Doors Salons. Inc.. et al., Cae No. CGC-08-471683
18 ("Complaint").
4.
19
Plaintiff' Complaint assers eleven (11) cause of action: (1) unlawful wage
20 deductions; (2) compelled patroniztion; (3) failure to reimbure business expenses; (4) failur to
21 pay overtme compesation; (5) payment of secret wages; (6) failure to provide accurate wage
22 statements; (7) failur to pay wages for break periods; (8) failure to pay wages for mea periods;
23 (9) waiting time penalties; (10) ilegal non-competition agreements; and (11) unair and uiawful
24 business practices.
5.
25
A copy of the Sumons, Civil Case Cover Sheet, Complaint, Notice of Case
26 Mangement Conference and Civil ADR Program Packet were sered on Red Door via its Agent
28
2
(No. )
27 for Service of
Process, CT Corpration Sysems, on Februar 19, 2008. This is the first date upon
NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO FEDERA COURT
552038
Exhbit "1"
Page 6
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/201200f
Document 6-2
FIRST LEGAL
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 5 of 74
41 '1)1331
1 which Defendants received a copy of the Complaint. True and correct copies of the documents
2 sered on Defendants are attached hereto as Exhibits A though E.
6.
3
Because Red Door is the only named Defendant and the only Defendant served
4 there are no other consents required for removaL.
5
7.
No furter related proceedngs have been hear in San Francisco Supeor Cour.
6
8.
Ths Notice is timely in that it has bee filed within thirty (30) days of Plaintiffs'
7 serice of the Complaint.
8 JUSDICTION PURSUAN TO TRAITIONAL DIVRSITY OF CITIZENSIDP
9.
9
This action is a civil action over which this Cour has origial jursdiction under 28
10 V.S.C. § 1332, and is one which may be removed to ths Cour by Defendat puruat to the
11 provisions of28 D.S.C. § 1441
(a) in that it is a civil action betwee citizens of different states and
12 the amount in controvery exceeds the sum of
10.
13
$75,00, exclusive of
interest and costs.
During the entire coure of their employment with Defendant, Plaintiffs were
14 employed in the State of Californa. Declaration of Susan Haas ("Haa Declaration") at , 4,
15 attached hereto as Exhbit F. Plaintiff Lisa Knght provided Red Door with addreses located in
16 Concord and San Fracisco, Californa as the location at which she elected to recve
Marcie Dave provided Red
17 communications from Red Door durng her employment. ld. Plaintiff
18 Door with an addres locted in Milbrae, California as the location at which she elected to receive
19 communcations from Red Dor during her employment. ld. Plaintiffs are therefore citizens of
20 the State ofCaIifomia. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1) (an individua is a citize of
the state in wmch
21 he or she is domicied).
i 1.
22
Red Dor was at the time of the fiing of this action, and remains, a citizen of the
23 State of Arzona, in tht it was and continues to be a corporation incorprated under the laws of
24 the State of Arzona with its principal place of
busines in Arzona. Haas Declaration at' 3. Red
25 Door is a citizen of the State of Arizona for diversity purposes. Red Door is not a citizen of the
26 State of
California. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(c)(1).
28
3
(No. )
27
NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO FEDERA COURT 552038
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 7
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20/2oof
Document
6-2
FIRST
LEGAL Filed 03/31/2008
41 ''i1331 Page 6 of 74
1 2. Defendats Does 1 through 25, inclusive, are fictitious. The Complaint does not
2 set fort the identity or status of any said fictitious defendants. The citizenship of defendants sued
3 under fictitious names should be disregarded for puises of detennining diversity jursdiction
4 and canot destroy the diversity of citizehip between the paries in ths action. Newcombe v.
5 Adolf
Coors Co., 157 F.3d 686, 690-91 (9t Cir. 1998).
6 13. Plaintiffs' Complaint is silent as to the total amount in controversy. As such,
7 Defendant nees only to establish by a preponderance of evidence that the amount in controversy
8 in Plaintiffs' Complaint exce the jursdictional minimum. See e.g., Sanchez v. Monumental
9 Life Ins. Co., 102 F.3d 398, 404 (9th Cir. 1996).
10 14: Defendant denes Plaintiffs' claims of wrongdoing and denes their requests for
11 relief
thereon. However, the amount in controvery in Plaintiffs' Complait, including the total
i 2 amount of wages, penalties, interes, attorneys' fees, injunctive relief and other monetar relief, is
13 more likely than not in exce of$75,00.00, caculated as follows:
i 4 a. Plaintiff Lisa Knght ("Knght") was employed as an aesthetcian with Red
15 Door at its saon locaed at 126 Post Street in the City and County of San
16 Francisco, Californa ("San Fracisco Salon") from Februar 1999, until July
17 2007. Complaint at 1M1, 2.
18 b. In 2004, Knght's grss income was approximately $21,557.38. In 2005,
19 Knight's gross incoe was approximately $21,054.56. In 2006, Knght's gross
20 income was approximately $24,940.45. Haa Declartion at ,¡ 5. This equates
21 to an average annual gross income of approxiately $22,517.46 ($21,557.38 +
22 $21,054.56 + $24,940.45/3 = $22,517.46). This equates to an average weekly
23 wage of approximately $433.03 ($22,517.46/52 = $433.03). Ths equates to
24 an average daily wage of approximately $86.61 ($433.03 /5 == $86.61). This
25 equates to an average hourly wage of approximately $10.82 ($86.61 / 8 =
26 $10.82).
28
4
(No. )
27
NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO FEDERA COURT 552038
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 8
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
03/20/200f
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
Page 7 of 74
4" '1)1331
c. In Counts One, Two, Thee and Eleven of the Complaint, Knght alleges that
2
Defendants "regularly deducted" amounts from her wages violation of
3
Californa Labor Code §§ 221, 450, 2802, and California Business and
4
Professions Code § 17200. Knight will likely claim that these claims ar
5
governed by a four-year statute of limitations. See CaL. Bus. & Prof. Code §
6
17208.1 Defendant denies Plaintiffs' claims. Neverteless, assuming the
7
validity of Plaintiffs' allegations, and assung that $50 was improperly
8
deduct from each week of
9
claims is approximately $10,400 ($50.00 x 208 weeks = $10,400).
Knghts pay, the amount in controvery for these
10
d. In Count Four of the Complaint, Knght seeks reimbursement for wages and
11
overme allegedly worked but not recorded or paid by Defendant. Knght
12
claims tht "by failng to compenate Plaintiffs and the Clas at a rate of one-
13
and"one-half (1 Yi) times the reguar rate of
14
(8) hour in a workday or above forty (40) hour in a workweek, Defendants
15
violated Californa law,'" Complaint at ir 46. This claim is governed by a thee
16
year statute of limtations. See Ca. Labor Code §§ 338(a), 1194. Defendant
17
denies Plaintiffs' claims. Nevereles, assuming the validity of Plaintiffs'
18
allegations, and assumng Knght clais she was not compesated for five (5)
19
overtme hour each week, the amount in contrvery for this claim is
20
approxiately $12,659.40 ($16.23 x 5 hour x 156 weeks = $12,659.40).
pay for work peronned above eight
21
e. In Count Six of the Complaint, Knght alleges entitlement to penalties for
22
violations of Californa Labor Code § 226(a) perainng to Defendant's alleged
23
failure to provide correct and accurate itemized wages statements. Complaint
24
25 1 In Coi.t Five of th Complaint, Plaitiffs claim that Defendant "reresented to Plaintiffs and each
member of the Class tht they were payig prope overte to the Plaitiffs and members of the Class,
26 while actuly payig Plaintiff and mebers of
~(No.
5)
the Class less th the rate that was owed." Complaint at
this alleged conduct. As a result, this claim
the amount in controversy.
11 SO. Plaintiffs do not allege any distinct injur as the result of
27 is not consider in Defendant's calculation of
552038
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 9
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
03/20/200P
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
Page 8 of 74
4'--'61331
employer "who violates subdivision
at ~ 55. The Labor Code provides that any
2
(a) of Section 226 shall be subject to a civil penlty in the amount of two
3
hundred fifty dollar ($250) per employee per violation in an initial citation and
4
one thousand dollar ($1,00) per employee,for each violation in a subsequent
-
5
citation." Cat. Laor Code §226.3. This claim is governed by a one-yea
6
statute of limitations and a $4,00 ca on damages, per employee. See
7
Blackwell v. Skyest Airlines, Inc., 245 F.R.D. 453,462 (S.D. CaL. 2007); CaL.
8
Labor Code § 226(e). Durng her employment at Red Door, Knight was paid
9
bi~weekly. Haas Declartion at' 5. Defendant denies Plaintiffs' allegations.
10
Neverteless, assumng the validity of Plaintiffs' allegatons, the amount in
11
controvery for this claim exce the $4,000 statutory cap (24 payments x
12
$250 = $6,000).
13
f. In Count Seven of the Complaint, Knight alleges daages for missed rest
14
perods pursuant to Californa Labor Code § 226.7 and Wage Order 2-2001.
15
Complait ii 60. The Labor Coe provides for one hour of additional pay, as a
16
penalty, for each workday that a rest perod is not peitted. Plaintiff will
17
likely argue that this clai is govered by a theeyea statute of limitations.
18
See White v. Starbucks Corp., 497 F.Supp.2d 1080, 1085 (N.D. Cal. 2007).
19
Defendant denies Plaintiffs' claims. Nevereless, assuming the validity of
20
Plaintiffs' allegations, and asswning the alleged conduct occued on thee (3)
21
workdays in each work week, the amount in controversy for ths claim is
22
approximately $5,063.76 ($10.82 x. 3 hours x 156 weeks = $5,063.76).
23
g. In Count Eight of the Complaint, Knght alleges claims for missed meal perods
24
pursuant to Californa Labor Code § 226.7 and Wage Order 2-2001. The Labor
25
Code provides for one hour of additional pay, as a penalty, for each workday
26
that a meal perod is not provided. Plaintiffs willikely argue that this claim is
27
governed by a thee-year statute of limitations. See White v. Starbucks Corp.,
28
(No. )
NOTICE OF REMOV AI TO FEDERA COURT
6
552038
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 1 0
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03120/200P
Document
6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 9 of 74
FIRST LEGAL
4 J" ~61331
497 F.Supp.2d 1080, 1085 (N.D. Cal. 2007). Defendant denies Plaintiffs
2
claims. Nevereless, assuming the validity of Plaintiffs' allegations, and
3
assuming the alleged conduct occured on thee (3) workdays in each work
4
wee, the amount in contrversy for this claim is approximately $5,063.76
5
($10.82 x 3 hour x 156 weeks = $5,063.76).
6
h. In Count Nine of the Complaint, Knght seeks waiting time penalties under
7
California Labor Code § 203, which provides that wages contiue at an
8
employee's daily rate of pay until the final wages are paid, or an action to
9
recver them is commence, up to a maximum of 30 days. See Mamika v.
10
Barca, 68 Cal. App. 4th 487,493 (1998) (providing pealty under § 203 as the
11
"calculaton of a daily wage rate, which ca then be multiplied by the number
12
of days of nonpayment, up to 30 days."). Defendant denies Plaitiff' clais.
13
Neverteles, assumng the validity of Plaintiffs' allegations, and assuming
14
Plaintiffs prevai on ths claim, the amount of controvery for this claim is
15
approximately $2,589.30 ($86.61 x 30 days = $2,589.30).
16
1. In Count Ten of the Complaint, Knight alleges that she signed a written
17
agreeent with Defendat statig: "For six (6) months afer the terination of
18
your employment with the Company for whatever reaon, you shall not directly
19
or indirecly render hair, beauty, nail, or other servces ordinarly provided by a
20
Company Spa/salon, to or for any peon, fi, corpration (including self-
21
employment) directly or indiretly involv~ in the provision of such serices
22
within a 5 mile radius from the home spa where you were employed, unless
23
wrttn consent by the Company is granted." Complaint at , 72. Knight
24
alleges that ths agreement violates Californa Business and Professions Code §
25
16600, and requests declaratory and injunctive relief. Complaint at W 73-74.
26
When plaintiffs sue for declaratory ,and injunctive relief based upon the
27
existence of a non-competition agreement, cour consider the amount of
28
(No. )
NOTICE OF REOV AL TO FEDERA COURT
7
552038
Exhbit "I"
Page 11
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
03/20/200F
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 10 of 74
41 '''61331
FIRST LEGAL
revenue generated by the affected employee in determining whether the
2
"amount in controversy" exces the relevant jurisdictional minimum. See
3
e.g., Mahoney v. DePuy, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85856, *12~ 13 (RD. CaL. Nov.
4
8, 2007). The amount of revenue Knight generated in 2007 was approximately
5
$44,250.47. Haas Declaration at 'f 5. Defendant denes Plaintiffs' claims.
6
Nevertheles, assuming the validity of Plaintiffs' allegations, and assuming
7
Plaintiff prevail on tls clai, the amount of controversy for this claim is
8
approximately $44,250.47.
9
J. Based on the amounts in contrversy for Counts One, Two, Thee and Eleven
10
($10,40.00); Four ($12,659.00); Six ($4,000.00); Seven ($5,063.76); Eight
11
($5,063.76); Nine ($2,598.30); and Ten ($44,250.47), the amount in
12
controvery for Knght's claim is approximately $84,035.29, which is over the
13
jursdictional amount require for removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a).
14
k. Knight also seeks to recver her reasonable attorneys' fee. Complaint at ir 80.
15
lt is well-setled that, in detennning whether a complaint meets the amount in
16
contrversy requirement, the Cour should consider the aggegate value of
17
claims for damages as well as attorneys' fees. See e.g., Galt GIS v. JSS
18
Scandinavia, 142 F.3d 1150, 1155-56 (9th Crr. 1998). Assumg tht Knight's
19
attorneys' fees will constitute 25% of
20
that amount would equa approximately $21,000, fuer exceeding the $75,00
21
theshold set fort in 28 V.S.C. § 1332(a).
the amount in controvery for her claims,
22 15. The preponderace of the evdence is that the amount in controversy sought by the
23 facial allegations of Plaintiffs' Complaint is greater than the jursdictional amount of $75,000.00.
24 Thus, removal of this action is appropriate.
25 / / /
26 / / /
28
8
(No. )
27 / / /
NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT 552038 I
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 12
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/201200F
DocumentFIRST
6-2LEGALFiled 03/31/2008
Page 11 of 74
4"~61331
JURISDICTION PURSUAN TO THE CLASS ACIION FAIRNESS ACT
16.
2
The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2i, as amended,
3 provides federal jurisdiction over any class action with at least 100 member, as follows:
4 The distct cour shall have original jursdiction of any civil action in
which the matter in controvery exceeds the sum or value of $5,000,000,
5 exclusive of interests and costs, and is a class acton in which -
6 (A) any member of a class of plaintiffs is a citizen of a State different from
any defendant.
7
17. This is a civil action over which this Cour also has origial jursdiction under 28
8
U,S.C. § 1332(d) and one that may be removed to this çour by Defendant pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
9
§§ 144l(b) and 1446.
10
18. This action has been stled as a class action pursuant to Californa Code of Civil
11
Proceure § 382. Complaint at ~ 19. Plaintiffs seek to represent: ~'All hair stylists, aestheticians,
12
masseuses, or any similar commissioned worker, employed by Defendants to work at (Red Dor)
13
with the applicable statute of limitations perod though the date of ths action's fial
14
dispsition." Complaint at ~ 18.
15
19. Defendant has employed approximately 79 different "hair stlists, aestheticians,
16
masseuses, or any similar commissioned worker" at Red Door's San Francisc Salon since 2004.
17
Haa Declaration at' 5. Defendant has employed over 100 different "hai stylists, aestheticians,
18
masseuses, or any similar commssioned workers" in the State of
Californa since 200. ¡d.
19
20. As set forth above, Plaintiff are citizens of the State of Californa and Defendat is
20
a citizen of the State of Arzona. Accordingly, Plaitiffs are citizens of a state different from the
21
Defendants.
22
21. Plaintiffs' Complaint is silent as to the total amount in controversy. As such,
23
Defendant needs only to establish by a preponderance of evidence that the amount in controversy
24
25
26
28
9
QNo. )
27 2 None of
the exceptions set fort in 28 U,S,C. § 1
332(d) apply to th instant action.
552038
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 13
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20/20011
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 12 of 74
41 '')131
FIRST LEGAL
1 in Plaintiffs' Complaint excees the jursdictional minimum. See e.g" Sanchez v. Monumental
2 Lif Ins. Co., 102 F.3d 398, 404 (9t Cir. 1996).
3
22.
Plaintiff allege that their claims ar tyica of the claims of each putative clas
4 member. Complaint at" 21. Assuming that the amount in controversy regarding Knight's claims
5 is "typical" of
the claims of each member ofthe putative class, and based upon the calculations set
6 forth above, the total amount in controvery for the member of the putative class, excluding
7 attorneys' fees is approximately $8,403,529 ($84,035.29 x 100 members = $8,403,529).
8
23.
As a rest, although Defendant denies Plaitiffs' claims for wrongdoing and
9 denies their requests for relief
thereon, based upon the factal allegations in Plaintiffs' Complaint
10 and assuming, arguendo, Plaintiffs were able to prove these allegations, the total amount in
1 1 controversy sought by Plaintiffs and the other putative class members is in excess of $5 milion,
12 exclusive of interest and costs, plus attorneys' fees. Removal under the Clas Action Fairness Act
13 is therefore appropriate.
14 NOTICE TO PLAITI
15
24.
Contemporaeously with the filing of ths Notice of Removal in the United States
16 Distrct Cour for the Norter Distct of Californa, wntten notice of such filing wil be served
17 on Plaintiffs' counsel of recrd. In addition, a copy of this Notice of Removal wil be filed with
18 the Clerk of the Cour for San Francisco County Superor Cour.
i 9 WHEREFORE, havig provided notice as required by law, the above-entitled action
20 should be reoved from the San Fracisco County Supeor Cour.
Marh, 2008.
21 RESPECTFULLY SUBMIED ths 19t day of
22
23
ensn
24
venue of the Star, 28th Floor
25
geles, California 90067
26
28
10
(No. )
Attorneys for Defendant
27
NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT 552038
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 14
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
FIRST LEGAL
03/20/200f
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 13 of 74
4' ~61331
?/; f:l-:' ~ 'i 0 l.~~ Ii "-
e1/31/26es, 14:58
MlH
415:4 .552
PAG B4/21
S . 0
SUMMONS
1' COlllli DIY
~o PMIIl 6I1. i:
(CltACION JUDICIAL)
NOTice TO DEFENT:
(AVtSoAi DEMOA):
RED DOR SALONS. INC., an Aroo Corporation and DOES I
(lirough 25. inclusive,
YOU ARE BEING SUep BY PlN1;
(LO tETA DENDANDO El. DE/Une):
USA KNIGl an MARCIE DA \I on behalf of th'lNe an th
similarly situted.
Yoiliwat CAi.NDA l)Yl'" \i l- an i- pi .. _. OI JO Co". wrl ,. ot tlll eo -i "'ve.
CCl I8 011 lb,l- A ..rClqli- ciw. ii.l,. V_WI-i_.. Mli pr lIl-If1O.-i1i
-l 10 lr' 1OCl T1 Il... co l-lI yo _.. lO pit- '10i.1 ft iiCCfoi .iid MC
Infcll Il_ Cd Co anN .. ~ (w.e.clpyoCOlW i- 1I. Of .. wur_
ft_~ll If~ou -ipa tlfl.. -i ll,uoll~ fon_.... IfJO-.. .
yo
ns- OI "li fou mi
10M ti _ iw cluic -i JO W. ...iid pnpe -l .. li WI ~r"" lilI oo
,"_ot ""'ll'il YOIt 1l-l1o ail.. ~ tf-,.lfJO ci ii"_,,~. ro ll -i lD calhA
at"" Nl.',OIl _at-lII~. ~ -r - 0I l-fi fl-- lr _lIpro i.-l
prolJrl You ...IO.. i- lI." c... $e 1M.. i-.i-iIaOI !h Ctila
~ One acHl-i l'll iw.iCI..Ilpt ci bJ ci l"'" ia _It or -l bi ü8lS.
fi,'" iia-i yiiqI-lflh;..",_
~..
u..~._..
""40"~
s.,.¡iai l.e~
__lb
,.
-i
_
....,.
..-..,.
ci
..
pt
aiMp
li
ftØ/
pl- i-..li_~ I' ~..~ de,IiOl,..W~.." CM.~ tll-CG de
TIeJO DIM DE CA Øt *_10 1r'" dt yi- /fP*~- ÌU, plflli
Ca(_~~IJJl..ii_-~,. "'. ~ lMledw aè- 0 ii,. cm.,ll al" Ar $/li
su ~. i' ".~cl.. pI''-i'Ii~y'' CO,."... - -i dl ...,. .. ~
pUlpl /. l- .~_ fI.M g Meo 4U" ii..1M '" -- HfI. ct llno pm-i
Ha -ni,.. Ee, ~..rUlln Ql l- 1III-l ti.~ 81li __. ØI ol.jl... Ul
sfl df i-,... S/li"" /I .I~.. .. po.iCl GC Ii Il /1 ci ntci
""1I li l- ",' de .. -l . ti . i- ,. -i__lfsI f/l dflulO en ,/,f wñ,'"
~li 1..,11 ~ l-.Il."ar.. Il iic. dlAyu.'" eodlCl
ii na IS
r-.~0&.i,ii"1I 0 pøiidlll om -l _1i ei 0 "cMto de iipd/-l
(SIl y ih di " COH):
Superor Court ofCaifomla, County of
Sa fniÎsco
400 McAllistr 81rt
~~~=s~=ie~DfPi.imnllme.oipllnwlllla1)'.ls:
~".d:'," r' ", ,,(
lEiimbni. 1I Ø1 Y ti tl d. ,fM dølIad de dlle. 0 de dMll al/ no tInc ~ 'ê.s: ":; ,
(FeO/eJ ~~ (Ai)
Oe,iy E. Mos, E1.. Ma Patrcia. Hough, Es.. De M. Thii &q"
MOS~ &)J~t\~ _an
Nes Avene. SultlL2'p,1~~_r:~~-S) 399-11\0 ,
DATE:' ~1\1 GQ\i ci i:Ä .o.puly
(Fo~of"rvølthluumii-. ilProofSelViufSUoi jJ 10). J,
(Ptlr8 pI/l de enfr de lIa c: lI'" bm Pn or Sa of Su. (POS-01O,).
1S'l
. NO 10 TH Pi SERVD: You 8t 6ed
1; CJ as., lnlVkW ilfet
2. 0 li tl pe sued ~1h ~ na ~(~Il\:~ ( -t Vl W' Ik ~ i ~ _
3, òë on behalf of (l,i): ~ \)(1:: ~ "'.) \ ' c: ò( ~ dl~
I'un~r. ~ CC "16.10
(oorp\l) CJ CCP..16.0(ml ~
d CC-41UO(deCOIl) c: CC416.?0 (COeIValce)
t: CO 41eAO (assocaton or Pfnil9) 0 COP" tB.1i (aut peJSl
c: Olr (spJ:
.iiill_
4. 0 by pell de on (dBfI):
". AdIiIl UI
Sl 101 ¡l., .i " Zt"1
SUMMNS
Po Ult
C-lIC"_15~.
~....I__..WM
1fi6M?li.Ir.lmæ~q-?P1
EXHIBIT A
Exhbit "A"
Page 11
Exhbit "1"
Page 15
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 14 of 74
41' ''1131
FIRST LEGAL
03/20/2ooR
Service of Process
CT CORPORATION
A WolteriKIu C~
Transmittal
02119100
CT Log Numbr 513101888
IIIBOIII.IIUlIlllllIllnU
TO: Gabrila Mack, Tax Manager
Bliiith Aren Salons. Inc.
3822 E Unl Dr, S1e 5
Phonix, AZ 85034-
REi Process Served in Calornia
FOR Red Door Salos, inc, (Dostic State: AZ)
ENOSED AI COI' Of LEGA PROCESS RECaI BY "'E $TATlI AGEN OF Tf AaVE CO AS FO,
11 Of AeiiON.
Us Knlgt and Marci Dave, etc., Pl. vs. Red Door Salons, Inc, etc., et at Oils.
DOMEHT(S) SERVo.
Suns, Cor Shet. Comint. Notic, Atchment, Stlli Form, Case
çoURT/AGECY.
San fra CoutY San Franci, Suri Cour CA
Mana Statet
Case' CG7168
NATVE OF ACN.
Em
!-iin - For unlawfl wage deucs, for violti of lar. for failu to
reiurs bUS" expens and (alre to pay overtme compns
ON wH" PRSS WAS Sli
C T Corpatin Syste. -Los Angele, CA
DATe AND HOUf O~~.
By Pro Seir on 021191200 at 09;00
AIEAIl 011 AHSW DUEl
wi 30 days aft 8elVlc. file wren iepon If 7-3- at 9;00 a.m. . Cas
ATT£Y(S) i SENOIRlS)i
Gary E. Moss
Ma Conferenc
Mo & Thugh
601 Van Nes
Ava
Sa Fra, CA 941 02
41S-~99.1110
ACTIN lTt
SOP Paprs with Tran via Fed Ex 2 Day, 191003260380
SIGNS:
CT~ Sysm
Ema NOUfti.GablaMacogmackOOrdspa.co
PIl
AD
TElON
&'~ Sevent Stret
LosAnele. CA9017
213-3?-415
Page' of 1/JD
In di-- 01 lh Iienlo fo CT Ccnotks
_ii
p__ on -i II pn 10 lh m: lo
q.... 'i Worm do no cioO ilI Dpl
HIO tIll of 1d0n, tIl- 01 di h _ di",
IK 11 In t: In \h ..II till
Roc Is iu for fnlJlI Sld ~ ind fo
Il ~ id Slii- on C* mal ni
ca i-.f i-ii' DI, na CDi.
_SQ/~
(~, ;¿/2'o,/08
Exhbit "A"
Page 12
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 16
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
03/20/200f
8i/31/2888 14: 5~
FIRST LEGAL
4153991552
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 15 of 74
4' '61331
M05SUG
PAGE 62/21
_i:tll 0Nl'
"'w:~oll:r~~'\t'Pttr.;t S3N 104$42
Doèk 1'. !$. SaN 248897
MOSS
& HOUGH _ '
601 Von Na A"llll!ISUÎU 2030. Sail fraol~. CA 94102
ENeeR8EQ
$ør FmnlkJ ok Ë 0
11!U'HOI.HO: 4151399.1110 ,""_ 4J5/399-1552
&n\ II
IIntl'SuRIJ
-' ,,"~ Clllrl
IM CO ll CAIA, lI ll San FnicisÇ(
l!læHlS: 40 McAllir Strt
-._'" sae
JAN 8 1 2008
:~/erk
-
CIAIZlCQ San Fnicisc, CA 94102
D\~OROON PAFW i
CA8. NM
Us lC t & Martie Dave v. Red Dor saloDS Inc et al.
~jìi. i¡f' ,
CIL CASE COVER SHEET Compl c. DRnll
o unU~ 0 IJltd 0 OGntlf 0 Jo
(.lmot
(Ai
de , cl-- Is Fl w\ (li lIlJ deen ~UO
!l $2.00 $2.0 or le RI d Ci nâ 3.40 De
8- '411 bS:;
"1l 1- bt /1" _ ~ QI
Auto Ton Co
1. Chll _ tix bi fo 1h i- ty Ui l de Cl:
moll
(~&)
RiiIU.14l
c: (O)(l)
B tJSl
AU
(22)
BB
Bi0Ioroicort
0t
PIIIP
1i~
(il)
08mlgGØfIDHT6i' li-il1l)
D Al83 (0) 0 ot CI (37Y
li ""18c11r(411)
0 Eml~
8
iity (24), i-~ri(1')
Pn
o Pfuc
otPI/(23)
Niiii (0l Tar 0 Wro e' (æ)
, 0d
ClwI
(O)
(1S¡_ LJ
CoY!.i
(31)
§ sii DQ Ii ii(0T D Ot fi ¡lpw (2)
~ fni(lØ) Do RI(3) .
~~(19i OilM)
Olr
nø lD
135)
AsIlla_d
(Q!)
IMlit
Pltl
1';
(11)
~ 1e(3l) D W'll-i (Q
Piol ne (25) acii Re
PnlllO Ço Cl Utl
(ClRuloICc"'I_~
o ÁnJBe~(03)
l. tIci
(40(10)
8 Co
§ ~lJçtgr1I~)
~1l(i8)
-- ai
,li
ii
lI i:
ii ai
~ tn
ClSI
ty 141)
El~oI Jumanl '
o Ei rJ Jl (2)
~ Civ Cl8l
Oii (i
GØ
B RI
(1l sp ii (42)
MI. C1vll"
Ol pl (n1lll
~J ~143)
B Piitnlml
(2)
if OUt 11; OM le
2. Th Cl Is It nQ 0l iind ru 3.40 of ih Cl. Rul or ColL If th oae Is CO mi th . .:: 'il
'-I
r1K15
ni ex1l pi mø: ' "' :_:
a. D 1.. ntm ofae ra8d parec d.D lal1 of.l_ e: ,. ""
b. 0 ~ ln pl' i- dI Of no e.D COdon lIlh ra1ed 8C paln ii on (j mo CO.!t;
l8ue Vi wl bilI to i- In 0I to. ii. (j Il or In II fe ca
c. iz Sub emOU of ~ fI f. iz Su øo~tJu8lll6i '
3, Rem soug (ci .6 th ¡p: B.rn ni b.D noCl dG or ~unlla I1WGf ç, 0 punive
4. Nuof oa of lIn ($p)': Eleu eii)
:i. Ths C8 l1 Is 0 Is no a da ac su".
6. Illher are Il ic rete ce il øn ør ø ~ i: reted
Dae: Janua 31 :ZS
Patrcia
01_
Iì
· Plll ni li Ihl& (A 81ll wl !h fir pe \\ in \h ad ot ~ (axl 8I da C8 or ca iled
unerth Proll Co. Faml Co, or Wel- ii i",1l Coo¡.ICe. l'Je of Có nf 3.UO.) f8l1¥1I to 1I mii flt
l",,"~,
· fi this co elln -i to any QM 8hØ niqu b) Ic CO W.
oI pi to 1h ll or prQi ,
· If Il Ql1I co unlr nie 3.400 ei "£I. of \1. CaOl Ru or Co l/u mu ØI ø COY of this aw clØQI on 8l
. Unle.lh I. . co cee und I' S." 40 or a Cl CU th _ii wi bD UI fo 1118 ~
"'ii,=ii
CML CASE CÒVI SHeET
ei.ø,ø tf.. M¡ I. *'
Qf--"-~
-- ..
IMlW
EXHIBIT B
Exhbit "B"
Page 13
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 17
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 16 of 74
. -"26133
FIRST LEGAL
03120f20(
fv
81/31/2886 ¡q:58 4163991552
PAG ai/21
1 MICHAEL VON LOEWELDT (178665)
MICH NG (237915)
2 KERR&. WAOSTA~ LLP
~I.QQ¡aÆfl~
100 Spe Stree Suite 1800
3 San Francsw. CA 94105.1528
Telepone: (415)37J-85oo
Sin "'111l~.J
/ §,
0 t'''it"
11lP., t, fi;¡rl'
ìiipl1la,
4 Facile: (415) 37J-05oo
JÀN 3 1 teo8
5 GARYE.MOSS(4300)
MAY PA TRCJA HOUaH (I (4542)
aOAOO~Lr¥\Fll~i:I, ~I .,~
§~ ~~~~~~~-1- $I;i
- - .- .. Pá .~
6 DBREKM. THOMAS (248897)
MOSS &. HOUGH
LAW OFFICE OF
CAæ_CXær
. ~. l
7 601 Van Nesii Aven Suite 2030
811 Franel!lco, CA 94102
8 Telc.ponc; (415) 3991 110
Facimile; (415) 399.
9
J
SS2
JUL 3 . 2008 -9!lAM
Attrney fo Plaintitf
10 LISA JCTJGHT.'an MACm DAVE
on behaf oftbemseve an thos similarly situated
11
~21
12
TN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIORNI
13
FOR mE COUN OF SAN FRNCISCO
14
(ULIMED JUDICTON)
15
-- -~nA,,"47168:;
16 LfSAKNJOHTandMARClDAVE.onbeha1 ~
of thanselve an tboii siiiy situed,
Cue No.
11
Plaintif.
COMPLAI
18
VB.
19
RED DOR SALONS, lNC., an Ar
20 Corption an DOES I thug 25, jnclusive. JUY TR DEMANED
21 Defeail$.
p, ~~: F :i~'~ ",/\, ."~'i.t:
22
Jt"'~;' ~
23
Plaintif LISA KNIGHT ard MARCIE DA VB allege, on behalf oftllve an a
24
Clas of
25
thse mmilary situatec as fonows:
:PARTI
26
1.
Deendat RED DOR SALNS, INC., i. II eoipration th own and ope.tQ6 a
27
28
salon nnd day spa doig business under the ticttiouS name Elbet Arden Red Door Spa
Y. tAl
~, . .' . i. -........
WAc;erhFtli
'.:."
EXHIBIT C
1
rAf,.).:..
"Al\MI"'~ tlA......t"AAl\'
Exhbit "C"
Page 14
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 18
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20/20
"')261331Page 17 of 74
Document
FIRST
1
(hereinafter referred to as "RDS"). RDS is located at 126 Post Street, in the City and County of
2
San Fracisco, Californa.
2. Plaintiff LISA KNIGHT and MARCIE DAVE are former employee of
3
4
Defendant. KNIGHT was employed as an aesetician at RDS beginning in Februar 1999.
5
KNIGHT resigned her employment in July 2007. PlaintiffDA VE was employed by RDS as a
6
hair stylist from Januar 9, 2007 though and including Septembe 27, 2007. KNIGHT and
7
DAVE bring this actian on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated.
8
3. The tre names and capacities, whether inividual, corprate, assate or
9
otheiise, of defendants DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, are unown to Plaintiff, who therefore
10
sue these defendants by fictitious naes purt to Code of Civil Prcedure § 474. Plaintiffs
11
fuer allege that each of
12
and occurrences herein set forth. Plaintiff will amend this complaint to show these defendants'
13
tre names and capacities when asceined,
14
defendant is responsible.
15
thes fictitious defendants is in sonie maner resonsible for the acts
4. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and on that basis allege, that eah of
the
16
defendants named in this complaìt was an agent, servant, employee, co-conspirator, andlor joint
17
ventuer of each of the remaining defendants, and was at all times acting with coure and scope
18
of said agency, servce, employrent, conspircy and/or joint ventue.
19
5. Defendants, and each of
them, aided and abed, enèourged and rendered
20
substantial asistace in accomplishing the wrongfu conduct complaied ofhèrein. In takng
21
action, as parcuarzed herein, to aid an abet and sustatially assist the commssion of these
22
wrongful acts complained of, each of
23
primar wrongdoing and realized that hislher/its conduct would substantially asist the
24
accmplishment of
VENUE
26
6. Venue is prope in the County of
27
that are the basis of
28
II
K 2 R R
'._ _~.
& __.. .0-
WAGSTAPPß
the defendants acte with an awareness ofhislher/its
the wrongfl conduct and wrongdoing.
25
L '.P
as well as the maner in which each fictitious
San FrancisCQ because obligations and liabilties
ths action arose in San Fracisco County.
2
CompJirnt
Exh t "C"
Page i 5
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 19
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
FIRST LEGAL
03/20/2lY
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 18 of 74
;261331
GENERA ALLEGA TlONS
2
7.
KNIGHT was employed as an aesthetician by RDS. In that capacity, her
Plaintiff
3 primar duty was to provide skin ca and hair removal sece to clients. KNIGHT was
4 clasified as an employee and paid 'on a commission basis. KNIGHT's position was not exempt
5 from the overime requirements of Califonua law or any other provisions of the California Labor
6 Code.
7
8.
, PlaintiffDA VB was employed as a hair stylist by RDS. In tht capacity, her
8 primar duty was to prvide hair styling, coloring and related hair care serces to RDS clients.
9 DAVE was classified as an employee and paid on a commission basis. DAVE's position was
io, not exempt frm the overime requireents ofCalifonua law or any other provisions of
the
11 California Labor Cod.
12
9.
Plaintiff KNIGHT an DAVE were paid an hourly wage as a draw aganst
13 commissions. The price customer paid for Plaintiffs' services was set by Defendants. Upon
14 hire, Plaintiff were promised a set percentage of that price as a commission. The commission'
15 percentages promised to Plaiffs were set at 33% an 40% respetively. Plaintiffs' prar
16 duties were to pedonn serce for cuomer, not to sell products. However, Plaintiffs were
17 also paid a commission, ragig from 5% to 10041, on skin car, beauty and nail products
18 purchas frm the spa by their customers.
19 10. Dug Plaintiffs' employment, Defendants regularly and unlawfully deducted
20 amounts frm Plaintiff' wages to cover Defendants' own overhead and business expenses.
the serce but on a reduced price, referred
21 Plainti' comiissions were not paid on the price of
22 to by Defendants as a "commissionable prce." Defendants did not provide Plaitiff with a
23 breakdown or wntten explanation for the reduced servce price, however, the d~uctions were,
24 according to Defendants for:
25
a.
28
K l! l\ R
"assistant charges," i.e., Defendants forced Plaitiff
b.
For the "cost of matenals," whch included the products Plaintiffs were
requied to use as pa of thei employment. For example, when Plaitiff
... ._-~. '.' i. .,.... '" ,..
3
Ll P
Complant
WA(lSTAFFll
to pay for
the cost of other employees hired by Defendants.
26
27
The cost of
Exhb t "C"
Page i 6
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 20
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20120r
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
~. '''l6131
FIRST LEGAL
Page 19 of 74
KNIGHT perfonned hair removal, she was assessed a charge for the wax
2
she used in perfonning the serice. When PlaintiffDA VE colored hair,
3
she was charged for the tint.
4
c.
Defendants deducted unspeified sums for marketing;
5
d.
Defendants deducted unspeified sums for benefits (without defining what
the benefits were for); and
6
e.
7
Defendants deducted unspeified sums for operting expenss.
8 i 1. Plaintiffs are infonned and believe and allege thereon that Defendants applied
9 similar policies and deductions unifonn1y to all stylists, aesthetician and masseuses employed
10 by Defendants at RDS, an have done so consistently since at leat 2003.
11
12.
In addition, Plaintiffs were reqred to work on a schedule set by Defendants and
12 were usually required to stay at work for all scheduled hour whether or not they had customer
13 appointments. Plaintiffs were required to come to work approximately 15-20 minutes before the
14 beginning of each sceduled shift to prepare their work areas. Plaintiffs were also require to
15 attend meetings and clases in addition to their scheded work hours. Plaitiffs, however, were
16 not paid the proper amount of overme for the perod when they were require to work more
17 than eight hour a day in a workday or 40 hours in a work wee. Defendants failed to keep
18 proper time records, discouraged "early" clockng in, and therefore often failed to capture the
19 first 15-20 minutes of
20 Plaintiff' overime
work peormed. Defendants also unawflly and inacurtely caculated
plaintiff
pay based on the hourly rate of
, drw agaist commission, rather
21 than including plaintiffs' commis~ion income in the ''rguar rate" caculation as requirea by
22 Califonua law.
23
13.
Plaintiffs are infoimed and believe and allege thereon that Defendants similarly
24 failed to pay overte compensation at the correct rate to all stylists, aesthetician and masuses
25 employed by Defendants at RDS and have done so consistently since at leat 2003.
26
14.
Plaintiffs and other employees at RDS were sometimes required to work without
27 rest and ormeal breas as provide by IWC Wage Order No. 2-2001 (11HI2). Defendats
28 1/
R
- ."K". S- ,R_.,.
~ --
WAG$TAf'FE
lo ,
4
Complaint
Exlb t "C"
Page 17
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 21
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
FIRST LEGAL
03/20/2oP
Filed 03/31/2008
D '6131 Page 20 of 74
failed, however, to pay Plaintiffs or any other employee for these missed breas and meals as
2 required by law.
3 15. Plaitiffs and other employees ofRDS were required to enter into written
4 agreements which, in clea violation of California law, purrt to prohibit Plaintiffs and others
5 frm competig with RDS durng and after their employment by RDS.
6
16.
Plaitiffs bring this action on behalf of themselves and all other perns who
7 wer, are or wil be employed by Defendants as styist, aeshetcians and masse or any other
8 similarly commissioned positions at RDS, within the relevant sttute of limitations period
9 (hereinaftr ''the Class").
10 17. Plaintiffs, on bealf of themselves and th Clas, seek compensation for an
11 impropery witheld wages, uneimbur business expeses, missed meas and rest breaks, and
12 und-cmpensated overime work required or suffered or penÎitted by Defendants; injunctive
13 and declartory relief; liquidated and/or other damages; and penalties as peitted by law;
14 interest; attorneys' fee and costs.
15
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
of
16 18. Plaintiffs brig ths class action on behaf
17
18
themselves and the following
asceainable class (hereinafter ''te Class") of siilarly situte persons:
All hair stylists, aesetcian, ntaseu, or any similar
commissione worker, emloyed by Defendants to work at RDS
19
with the applicale sttute of
limitations peod though the date
of ths action"5 final disposition.
20
Civil Procedure § 382.
19. 11s action is brought pursuant to Code of
21
the
20. Plaintiffs are infonned and believe, and on that basis allege, that members of
22
Class are so numerous that joinder 'of all members is imprctcable. Wlle the exact number of
23
class members is unkwn to Plaintiffs at this tie and ca 'only be asceained though
24
discovery, Plaintiffs believe tht ther are more than fifty members of the Class.
25
21. Plaitiffs' clai are tyica of
the claims of
the Clas, becuse Plaitiffs and all
26
Defendants' same patter and practice of
, class membe sustained damages tht arse out of
27
makig wiawful wage deductions, failing to reimburse for expense, failng to pay proper
28
K E II R
u . ~ _ " "'W.~. ...~.
WAGSTAFfS
HP
5
Complaint
Exhb t "C"
Page 18
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 22
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
FIRST LEGAL
03/20/20r
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 21 of 74
.. :61331
overtime premium compensation, failng to provide prope rest and meal perods as required by
2 Californa law, failing to provide proper wage statements, failing to maintain prope time
3 recrd, and failng to pay all wages owed upon termination, an forcing employees to sign
4 ilegal and abusive "non-compete" agreements.
and adequately protect the interests of
5 22. Plaintiffs wil fully
the Clas, and have
6 retained classcounsel who are experence and competent in both class and employment
7 litigation. Plaintiff have no interts that are contrar to or in conflct with those of
the Class.
8 23. Plaintiffs know of no diffcuty to be encountered in the management of ths
9 action that would preclude its maintenace as a class action.
10 24. The likelihoo ofindividuaI Clas member persecutng separte claims is
the Clas do not have a significat interest in individually
11 remote, and individual member of
12 controllng the proseution of separate actons. Additionally, the prosecutiòn of separate actions
13 by individual class membes would create a risk of inconsistent and varng adjudications
14
conceing the subject of
this action, wluch adjudications could establish incompatible standards
15 of conduct for defendants under the law herein alleged.
16 25. There is a well-defined community of interest beween Plaintiffs an the members
17 of the Class. Questions of law and fact common to the membe of the Class predominate over
18 any questions that may affec only individual members, in that Defenants have acted in a
19 manner generly applicable to the enti Clas. Among the questions of law an fact common
20 to the Clas are:
21
a.
22
23
wages of
b.
c.
26
27
28
K I! R R
the Class;
Whether Defendants unlawfully deducted "cost of materials" from the
wages of the Class;
24
2'5
Whether Defendants unawfully deduced "asistat charges" frm the
Whether Defendats unlawfully deducted ')naretng" from the wages of
the Class;
d.
Whether Defendants unlawflly deducted ''benefits'' from the wages of the
Class;
-- -- --- -- ~ _..--- ----
6
.. .
Complaint
WAG$1'AFFE
Exhib t "e"
Page 19
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 23
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
FIRST LEGAL
03120/200
e.
1
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 22 of 74
~ '61331
Wheter Defendants made other unawful deductions from the wages of
the Class;
2
3
f.
4
Wheter Defendats otherwse failed to reimburse the business expeses
of
g.
.5
the Clas;
Whether Defendats unlawflly failed to pay overtime to the Class in the
proper amowits;
6
h.
7
8
Wheter Defendants failed to provide Class members proper brea
periods;
9
I.
Whether Defendats failed to provide Class members proper meal perod;
10
J.
Wheter Defendants failed to kee accurate records showing when Class
member be and ended each work and meal perod;
11
k.
12
Whether Defendats failed to provide itemized wage statements to the
Class member as required by Califoroia law;
13
14
L
Whther the non~mpetition contrcts Defendants force Class members
to sign are wuawfu;
15
m.
16
Whether the legal claims presented in this Complaint on behaf of the
Class have mert;
17
n.
18
Wheter Dedants' violations ofCaliforoia's labor laws constute
unawfl, unfar or fraudulent busines practice; an
19
o.
20
Whether member of the Class ar entitled to relief for Defendants'
violations of California labr laws an if so, the prope relief.
21
22 26. Accordingly. this acton should be maintaned as a class action.
TOLLING OF STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
2.3
24
27.
Any applicable statues of
2.5 knowig. and actve conceent of
limitations have been tolled by Defendant's continuing,
the facts alleged herei. Despite exercising reasnable
26 dilgence; Plaintiff and the Clas could not have discovered. did not discover, and were
27 prevente frm discoverng, the wrngdoing complained of herein.
28 1/'
K B R R
..." ..-_.
, _...-- --
W¡'GSTAFFll
LU
7
Complait
Exl t "C"
Page 20
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 24
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
FIRST LEGAL
03f2012()
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 23 of 74
~ '61331
1 FIT CAUSE
OF ACTON
FOR UNLAWFUL WAGE DEDUCTIONS
2 (BY PLAINTIFFS AND THE CLASS AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS)
3 28. Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the Class, re.allege and incorporate by
4 reference pargraphs 1 through 27 as if they were set fort herein.
5 29. California Labor Code secon 221 states, "It shall be unlawful for any employer
6 to collect or recive from an employee any par of wages theretofore paid by sad employer to
7 said employee."
8 30. As descrbed above, Defenants reguarly dedcted amounts from the wages
9 eared by Plaintiffs and other Class member for assistat fee, supplies, and other business and
10 overhea expeses. TIse deduction violated Labor Coe secon 221.
11 31. Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray for judgment as set forth below.
12 SECOND CAUSE OF AClION
FOR VIOLATION OF LABOR CODE SECTION 450
13 (BY PLAINTIFFS AND THE CLASS AGAINST ALL DEFENDANS)
themselves and the Class, re-alege and incorprate by
14 32. Plaitiffs, on bealf of
i 5 reference pargraphs 1 though 31 as if they were set fort herein.
16 33. Labor Code section 450 states tht "no employer. . . may compel or coerce any'
17 employee.. . to patronize his or her employer, or any other person, in the purchase of any thing
18 of
value."
19 34. As descrbe above, Defendants regularly requied Plaintiffs and all the other
20 Clas member to purchase proucts and servces frm Defendats by way of charges and other
21 deductions. Requiring Plaintiff and the other Class member to purchase proucts and seice
22 from the Defendants violated Labor Code section 450.
23 35, Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray for judgment as set fort below.
THIR CAUSE OF AClION
24
FOR FAIURE TO REIMURSE BUSIN EXPENSES
25
(BY PLAINTIFF AND THE CLASS AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS)
26 36. Plaintiffs, on behalf of
themselves and the Class, re-allege and incorprate by
27 reference paragrphs 1 thugh 35 as if they were set fort herein.
28 II
K ii R R
. "' ,", - " ..- -," .'~.
WAGSTA~FB
LLP
8
Complait
Exhb t "C"
Page 21
Exhbit "1"
Page 25
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
37.
1
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
03/20/20r'
Page 24 of 74
J" -;26133 t
Californa Labor Code section 2802 states, "An employer shall indemnify his or
2 her employees for all necsa expeditues or losses incu by the employee in direct
the discharge of
3 consequence of
his or her duties, or of
his or her obedience to the directions of
4 the employer, even though unlawful, unless the employee, at the time of obeying the directions,
5 believed them to be unlawfuL." This seion prohibits employers from requiring employees to
business overead to
6 incur uneimbursed business expeses and from passing on the cost of
the State of
7 employee. Labor Code secion 2802 represents a fudamental public policy of
8 California, and the righ created in tht secon are not waivable.
9
38.
As describe above, Defenants reguarly charged Plaintiffs and other Clas
Plaintiffs' duties including assistat fee,
10 member for expe necsa to the pedoimance of
11 materals chages, and other bUSness and overead expeses. In addition, Defendants failed to
12 reimbure Plaintiff or other Clas membe for any other busines expese incued by the
the Clas. Defendants' conduct violates Lar Code section 2802.
13 members of
14
39.
Wherefore, Plaitiffs pray for judgment as set forth below.
15 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
FOR FAU..RE TO PAY OVETIM COMPENSATION
THE CLASS AGAIST ALL DEFENDANTS)
16 (BY PLAINTIFFS AND
17 40. Plaintiffs, on behalf of themlves and the Clas, re-allege and incorporate by
18 reference paragraphs 1 though 39 as if
19
41.
they were se fort herein.
Califonua law requires that an employer such as Deendants compesate aU non-
20 exempt employee at a rate of one-and-one-half (1 Yi) ties the regular rate of
pay for work
21 perormed above eight hours in a workday or above fort (40) hours in a workee.
22 42. Plaintiffs and member of the Class were scheduled by Defendants to work more
23 than eight hours in a workday and/or forty hour per week, and did in fact work more than eight
24 hours in a workday and/or forty hours per week.
25 43. Plaintiffs and memer of
the Class ar non-exempt employee, and at all relevant
26 times have been and are entitled to be paid overime compesation for all overime hour
27 worked.
28 II
I( I! R R
. . ... li _."- ~..
WAGS'!AFFIl
9
Complait
ExJb t "e"
, Page 22
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 26
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20/20(1
Document
6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
J '6131 Page 25 of 74
FIRST LEGAL
44. At all relevant times, Defendants failed and refused to pay overtime premium
2 compensation to the membes of the Class for their hour worked in exce of eight hour in a .
3 workday or forty (40) hoW' pe week. Defenants also failed to make and keep accrate time
4 records showing when Plaintiffs and the Class began work and ended each work period. This
the work day and work required
5 problem is paricularly acute with respet to the begiing of
6 "before" a scheduled shift.
7 45. In addition, at all relevant times Defendants unlawfulJy failed to pay Plaintiffs and
8 the Class the corrct overme preium compesation under California law by miscalculatig the
9 relar rate used to caculate overime pay. The membe of the Class arelwere paid in par
10 based on commissions and other non-discretionar payments for hours worked tht are required
11 by law to be included in the rate used to calculate premi,wn pay. See Labor Code § 200; 29
12 U.s.C. § 207; Division o/Labor Stanards Enforcement Policies and Interpretations Manual §
13 49. Defendants, however, unlawfully calculated overime premium pay based solely on the
14 hourly "draw" against commssion, ignoring commissions and all other forms of
wages. As a
15 result, the rate used by defendants was subsantially les than the rate actually owed. Defendats
16 reported this incorrect rate to member of
the Class as ifit were the rae actlly owed, thereby
17 conceing their underpayment of overme from Plaintiffs and the other members of the Class.
18 46. By failing to make and keep accurate time recrd showing when Plaintiffs and
19 the Class began work and ended each work penod, and by faling to compesate Plaintiff and
20 the Class at a rate of one-and..ne-half (1 ~) times the reguar rate of pay for work peonned
21 above eight (8) hours in a workday or above forty (40) hour in a workweek, Defendants violated
22 - California law.
23 47. Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray for j~dgment as set fort below.
24 FI
CAUSE OF ACTION
FOR PAYMEN OF SECRET WAGE LOWE THA DESIGNATED
SCALE
25 (BY PLAIFF AN THE CLASS AGAIST ALL DEFENDANTS)
26 48. Plaitiffs, on behalf of
themselves and the Class, re-allege and incorprate by
27 reference paragrphs i though 47 as if they wer set fort herein.
28 II
K E R il
.. ... .'. " .. _ H _~ _...
I'AGSTAFFB
L L'
10
Complaint
Exh 't "C"
Page 23
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 27
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
FIRST LEGAL
03/20/2Of
i
Filed 03/31/2008
¡l 61331 Page 26 of 74
Labor Code secton 223 provide, "Where any statute or contrct requirs an
49.
2 emloyer to maintain the designated wage scale, it shall be unlawful to seretly pay a lower
3 wage while purrt to pay the wage designated by statute or contrct."
50.
4
Defendants represented to Plaitiffs and to each member of
the Class,that they
5 were paying proper overme to the Plaitiff and membe of the Class, while actually paying
6 Plaintiffs and members of
the Class les than the rate that was owed as a reult of
Defendants'
7 intentional miscalculation of the overtime rate. Th conduct repre~ts the payment of a secet
8 wage lower tha that owed by law in violation of
Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray for jugment as set forth below.
51.
9
Labor Code section 223.
SIXH CAUSE OF ACTION
FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE ACCUTE WAGE STATEMENTS
(BY PLAITIFF AND TH CLASS AGAIST ALL DEFENDANS)
10
11
12 52. Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the Class, re-allege and incorprate by
13 reference paragraphs i through 51 as if they were set fort herein.
53.
14
Labor Coe setion 226(a) requires an emloyer to "semi-monthly, or at the time
15
of each payment of wages, fush each orhis or her employee. . . an accurate itemzed
16
statement in wrting showing (1) gross wages eaed, (2) total hours worked by the employee. . .
17
rand) (4) all deductions. . .," along with other iionnation.
18
54. Labor Code sections 226(a) and 226.3 provide for damages and penalties for each
Lar Coe secion 226(a).
19 violation of
20
55.
Defendants failed to prvide Plaitiffs and each other member of the Clas with
21 the accurate statements required by Labor Coe secon 226(a) because the itemizations provided
22 by Defendants (1) under-reprted the amount of overime eaed by misreportng the regular
23 rate, (2) failed to report all hour worked, and (3) did not list all deductions. Accrdingly,
24 Defendants violated Labor Code seon 226(a) for Plaintiffs and each member of
the Class with
25 respect t to every pay perod dung his or her employment.
26 56. Wherefore, Plaitiffs pray for judgment as set forth below.
27 II
28 II
K Po R R
. . - ,..M .. " ", ~ _ . ~
l'AGSTAFFR
'-1.. ,
11
Complaint
Exh t "c"
Page 24
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 28
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03120!2Of
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
FOR FAIURE TO PAY WAGES FOR REST BREAK PERIODS
1
(BY PLAINTIFF AND THE CLASS AGAIST ALL DEFENDANTS)
2
3
Document
6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
4 '6131 Page 27 of 74
FIRST LEGAL
57. Plaintiffs, on bealf of
themselves and the Clas, fe-allege an incorprae by
4 reference pargrphs 1 though 56 as if they were set fort herein.
5 58. Californa law requires an employer to provide an employee ten minutes of duty
6 free "net rest tie" for every fom hours worked or "major frction thereof," with the rest peod
7 to be available nea'the middle of
the work peod, insofar as is practicable.
8 59. Member of the Clas, including Plaintiff were sometimes required to work
9 through rest break or were not given rest breas at all.
the Class
10 60, Under Californa law, Defendants are obligated to pay each member of
11 who worked through a ret brea or was not provided a proper rest break for ever four hours
1 i worked at the rate of one hour or reguar pay per violation.
13 61. Wherefore, Plaintiff pray for judgment as set fort below.
EIGHTH CAUSE OF AClION
14
FOR FAILURE TO PAY WAGES FOR MEAL PERODS
15
(BY PLAITIF AN THE CLAS AGAIST ALL DEFENDAN)
16 62. Plaintiffs, on behalf of
17 reference paragraphs 1 though 61 as if
themelves and the Clas, re-allege and incorporate by
they were set fort herein.
18 63. Caiforna law requires an employer to provide an employee with a mea peod of
19 not less tha thirty minutes for any work peod of more th five hours. California law also
20 requies an employer to provide employee working more than ten hour pe day a secnd meal
21 peod. Excet in specific circumstace not relevant here, unes the employee is relieved of all
22 duties durng the meal perod, the entire peod must be counted as time worked.
23 64. The nature of
the work perormed by Plaintiff
and the other Class Members was
24 not such that prevented them from being relieved of duty durg their restive meal periods.
25 Neverheless, members of
the Class were sometes requied to work through their meal perods
26 or were not given mea perods at alL. Defendants also failed to make and kee. accuate time
27 recrds recording mea perods provided, to Plaintiffs and the Class.
28 II
K ERR
"" . -. li ~.... -..-
W!'GST!'.IYE
u.
12
Complaint
Exhb t "C"
Page 25
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 29
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20/20('
Document
6-2
" '6133 i Page 28 of 74
FIRST
1 65. Under Californa law, Defendants are obligated to pay each member of the Class
2 who worked through a meal period or was not given a prope meal period at Ûle rate of one hour
3 of
regular pay per violation.
4 66. Wherefore, Plaintiff pray for judgment as set fort below.
5 NINTH
CAUSE OF ACTION
FOR WAITING TIM PENAL TIES UNER LABOR
CODE §203
6 (BY PLAITIF AN THE CLS AGAIST ALL DEFENDANS)
7 67. Plaintiffs, on behfofthemelves and the Class, re-aUege and incorprate by
66 as ifÛley were set fort herein.
8 reference paragraphs 1 thugh
9 68. At the time that Plaintiffs resigned and those other members of the Clas no
10 longer employed by Defendts resgned and/or wtre teninated, Defendants failed to pay
11 Plaitiffs any of
the amounts due as set fort herein. Defendants' falure to pay Plaintiffs and
12 other members of the Clas overme, mea and brea tie at the time of their resigßation and/or
13 terination violates Labo Coe sections 201 and 202.
14 69. Defendants' falure to pay the wages of Plaintiffs and othr mebers of the Class
15 was wilful and they
are entitled to penaties under Labor Code secon 203 which provides that
16 an employee's wages shall continue as a penty until paid or for a peod up to thi days,
17 whichever is shorter.
18 . 70. Wherefore, Plaitiff pray for judgment as set fort below.
19 , TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
ILEGAL NON-COMPETITION AGREEMENT
20 (BY PLAINIFF AND THE CLASS AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS)
21 71. Plaintiffs, on behalf of ~ems~lves and the Clas, re.ailege and incorprate by
22 reference paragraphs 1 thougb 70 as if
23 72. Dur the coure of
they were set fort herin.
their employment, Plaintiffs and the member of
the Class
24 ,were reqired to sign wrtt ageeents with Defendants that purrt to restct the right to
25 work of
Plaitiffs and the other membe of
the Class. Those agreeents provided, in violation
26 of California law: "For six (6) m.onths after Ûle teination of your employment with the
27 Company for whatever reason, you shall not directly or indirectly render hair, beaut, nail, or
28 other servces ordinaly provided by a Company Spa/salon, to or for any person, finn,
K II R R
'..,. _. - ár .- ~- ....
WAGS'rAf'f'll
L f. P
13
Complaint
Exhib t "C"
Page 26
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 30
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
d '6133\
FIRST LEGAL
03/20120r
Page 29 of 74
1 corpration (including self-employment) directly or indirectly involved in the provision of such
2 serices withn a 5 mile radius from the home spa where you were employed, unless wrtten
3 consnt by the Compay is granted."
4 73. This requirement, which purprt to completely eliminate the abilty Plaintiffs and
5 the other members of the Class from engaging in their vocation, violates Californa Busines and
6 Professions Coe section 166, which provides'that "every contract by which anyone is
7 restrained from engag in a lawfu profesion, trade, or busines of any kin is to that extent
8 void." Defendants' contract also violates well established Califomia public policy against
9 restrint on employment.
this provision by Defendants is thus a violation ofCalifornía law and
10 74. The us of
11 public policy. The in terrorem effect of ths ilegal contrct clUlls and impairs Plaintiffs and the
the Class' nghts notwthstding its ultimate unenforceabilty. Purant to
12 other members of
13 California Code of Civil Produre 1060, Plaitiffs and the membe of the Class are entitled to a
14 declaration that the non-competion provisions of their employment contrct are invalid and
15 unenforcle, and to an injunction aganst Defendants continuing to use such provisions in
16 current and futu contrcts in California.
17 75. Wherefore, Plaitiffs pray for judgment as set fort below.
ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
18
19
UNFAI AN UNAWF BUSINESS PRACTICES
(BY PLAINTIF AND THE CLASS AGAIST ALL DEFENDANTS)
20 76. Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves an the Class, re-aIlege and incorprate by
21 reference pargrphs i thugh 75 as if
they were set fort herein.
22 77. Ths caus of action is brougt pursuant to Business and ProfesionS Code secion
23 i 7200, et seq.
Defendants as descrbed above violates
24 78. The pattern and practice of conduct of
25 numerous laws and public policies of the State of Californa. As a result, such conduct
26 constitutes both an unfar and unlawful business practice in violation of
Busines and
27 Profesions Code sectiòn 17200 et seq.
28 II
K ERR
.. " ,_.~ ,
WAO;;TAFFB
i. f. P
14
Complaint
Exhb t "C"
Page 27
Exhbit "1"
Page 31
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/2012():
Document
6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
4" ~61331 Page 30 of 74
FIRST LEGAL
Business
79. In committing the unfair and unawfl business practices in violation of
2 and Professions Coe secion 17203, in an amount to be detemned at tral. Additionally,
the amounts that Defendats have impropely witheld from her and
3 Plaintiff seeks retution of
that seion.
their conduct in violation of
4. the Clas by virte of
5 80. Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray for judgment as set fort below.
6 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, on behalf of themselves and the Clas, pray fur relief as
7 follows:
8
i.
9
2.
Designation of Plaitiffs as representaves of the Class;
10
3.
Reimburent of all improper wage deductions and uneibur busines
'Certficaon of
this acton as a clas acton on behalf of
the Class;
11 expenses;
12
4.
Unpaid overme_premium compensation as provided by Californa law for
13 overtme hours worked;
14
5.
Compnsation at the rate of one hour of reguar pay for each instance in which
15 Plaintiffs or any other Class member worked though a rest break or was not provided a prpe
16 rest brea for ever four, hour worked;
17
6.
Compensation at the rate of one hour of regular pay for each ince in which
18 Plaintiff or any other Clas member worked thugh a mea perod or was not given a proper
19 mea peod;
20
7.
A declaratory judgment that the praice complaine of in ths complaint are
21 unawful under California law;
22
8.
An injunction agait Defendants and their offce, agents, succors,
23 employee, represntatives. and any and all perns acg in concert with it from engaging in
24 each of
the practce complained of
in this Complaint;
25 9. An award of dages, according to proof;
26 10. AU pealijes requir by Califoll law;
27 11. Attorneys' fees and costs, including expert fee, and expnses as provided by
28 California law;
K ERR
~ .",," ... " _..~-~~..
WAGSTAFFB
'"
15
Complaint
Exhb' "C"
Page 28
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 32
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20/200'
d '61331 Page 31 of 74
Document
FIRST6-2
12. For prejudgment and post~judgment interest at the maximum legal rate; and
i i 3. Such other relief as the Cour dees just and proper.
3 Dated: Januar 31, 2008
KERR & WAGSTAFFE LLP
4
LAW OFFICES OF MOSS & HOUGH
5
6
'/~
MAY-PATRICIA HOUGH
7
8
9
Attorney for Plaintiffs
LISA KNIGHT and MARCIE DA VB
on behalf of thelves and those similarly situated
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
lCEQR
.. -....
'. " -".'-"
WAGS'lIIFi'&
i.i.ii
16
Complant
Exh "t "C"
Page 29
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 33
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20/2()'
Document
6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
4" "'61331Page 32 of 74
FIRST LEGAL
CASE NUMBER: CGC-08-471683 LISA KNIGHT et al VS. RED DOOR SALONS, INC AN ARIZ(
NOTICE TO PLANTIFF
A Case Management ConferencB.ls set foi
DATE:
JUL.o3..2008
TIME:
9:00AM
PLACE:
Departent 212
400 McAllister Street
San Francisco, CA 94102~3680
All partes must appear and comply wit Local Rule 3.
eRe 3.725 requires th fiing and service of a case management statement form CM-11 0
no later than 15 days before the case management conference.
However,lt would facilitate the issuanc of a case managemet order
without an appearance at the case maagemnt conference if the case management
statement Is file. served and lod In Departent 212
twenty-fie (25) days bere the case managemet
Plaintif must seive a copy of this noti upon ea part to this acton with the summons and
complaint. Proof of serv subsequentl flIed with this cort shall so state.
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTIN POL1CY REQUIREMENTS
rr IS THE POUCY OF TH SUP.R COURT THAT EVY CIVIL
, CASE PARTICIPATE IN EIHER MEDlAnON, JUDICIA OR NON-
JUDIIA ARBITRATI, TH EAY SELEEN PROGRA OR
SOME SUITABLE FORM OF ALTERNATI DIUTE RESOLUTON
PRIOR TO A MANDATOR SETEMENT CONFERENCE OR TRIA
(SeE LOCAL RULE 4)
Plaintl must serve a copy of the Alternatve Dispute Resolution Information Package on each
defendant along wih the complaint. All conse must discuss AOR wit clients and opposing
consel and provide clients 'with a copy of the Altemative Dispute Resolution Infrmation
Package prior to filing th,e Case Management Staement.
(DEFENDANTS: Atnding the Case Mangement Conference doe not take the
must file a writtn
response with the court within the time limit reuired by law. See Summons.)
plac of filing a written reponse to the complainL You
Superior Court Alternative Dispute Resolution Coordinator
400 McAllster Street, Room 103 '
San Franclsço, CA 94102
(415) 551-3876
See Local Rules 3.&. 6.0 C and 10 D re stpulation to commIssioner actin as temporary juges
EXHIBIT D
Exhbit "D"
Page 30
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 34
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
03/20/20(\'
Page 33 of 74
4' '61331
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR.)
Program Information Package
Alternatives to Trial
other ways to
resolve a civi dispute..
There are
The plam1J se a copy of th.AR. birmon pae
on ea ifaloogwi th compl. (CR 2oi.9Cc))
.SDor Co
ofCaor
San
Ft
County
AD-i ioler (1)
EXHIBIT f.
of
l' I
Exhbit "En
Page 31
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 35
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document
6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
4' '61331 Page 34 of 74
fIRST LEGAL
03/20/20r
Introduction
lawsuits sette without a tral?
Did you know that most civl
And did you know tht thre ar 8 nl.ber of was to relve ciil disput wiout
having lOSUB some~y?
Thes alteties to a lauit are kn as altie disput reutns (A). '
Th mo co fo of ADR ar med. aron and case evaat.
Ther are 8 number of otr krad of ADR as weL
In ADR, tr.lmpal pe deci dI or help pa de diut'
thes Th.. are ca 1M. Fo eX8pf In meia th
llutlls th meia. Ne nOrmll.. chen by th disputng part or by
lt cort NeutriS can hep paes rø dis wiout hang to go to court
dispute reoln
ADR is not ne., ADR is availbl in man comunlt through
programs and prvate neut.
Advantages of ADR
ADR can'hàve a numbe of advantaes over ¡¡ lawuit.
. ADR can save time A dispute oftn can be reolved in a matt of month even
weks,through ADR, while a lawsui can take Y~rs~
. AM can save J1oney. Court costs, attrns fe, and exp fee can be saved.
· AM can be cootie. Th mea that th partes having a dJsput may work
,,
toge wi th nel to i-lve th dlpu an agre to a re th in
se to thm. ra
th wo agnst ea ot.
. ADR ca re st Th ar fe. If an, cort appenC. And bese
AD ca be sp, and sa mony, an beus the..rt ar nor
cootie, AD Is .. l) th nerVes. Th paes don't hae a lawsuit
'hangg over their hea for yea. ,
, ,
. ADR enco partip. Th~ pa may have more chs to tell thir
side of the sto 'than In court an nJY ha mo control over the outcme. '
. ADR Is nexle. The part can choose the ADR prces that Is bes fo them.
For exmple, In meian the pa ma,ded how to reol thelrdlspu.
. ADR can be mor sat. For 81111 ab,reoos. many peple have
repone a high d8gre of satlsfa&n with ADR. '
AD.i 10/07 (I)
Pa
2
Exlbit HE"
Page 32
Exhbit "1"
Page 36
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
03120120r
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 35 of 74
¡J' ",61331
FIRST LEGAL
Beus 0' the adta, many paes choos ADR to reole a dispute
in of filing a lawst. Even Wh a laui ha IJn file th cort ca re
appeled. '
th dfsput to a neull befre the partes' poit h.~n and the lauit bees
cost. ADR has ben us to relve disput even aftr a trl, when th result Is
Disadvantages of ADR
ADR may not be suitae for every diput
. . If AD Is bing, th pa nor give up mot cOur prteo.. ing
a declslon by a
re for leal
ju or Jur unde foft ru of evce and pr, -id
err by 8n appla cort
. There geerall is Je opponf'to fi ou abot th otr sie's ca wi
ADR than wi lltl AD may no be"'
if It take plce before the
paes have sutnt Infonnatl to reole th disputé.
. Th ,neutl may chi,. a fee for his or her aec~.
, .
. If a dispute Is not reolv through AD the part may have to pu tie and
mone int both AM and a lauit.'
. Lauit mus be brught wiin tplf pes of-tie, knn as statu of
Iflltlon. Paes mus be carel no to let a sttu of Umltll run ouWhe
a dipute Is in an AOR pr. '
JiR-i 10/07 (j)
hp3
Exlbit "E"
Page 33
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 3 7
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
03/20/200f
Page 36 of 74
4'- "61331
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROGRAMS
Of the San FranciscO Superior Court
.It is the poliCY of the Super Court that ever nonaimlnal, non
juvenile
ca partte ei in an eay se co, meiation.
arn, '~r1 nel evUo or so ot altti dise
relut pr pr to a mator set cofer or trl..
(Sup cou Lo Rul 4)
Th gue is dene to ast attorys; th cU and sel-rted
liant in co ~ Sa Fra Suri Corts àle ,
di relulioll t-AD po. Attys ar èn to sh this
gue wi cliets. By mag infrm chce about dispu re
alerties, attor. thei clen and se-rte li may,
achiee a more sain reut of. ci di. Th, San Francisc Superr,
Cort currntly of three ADR progra fo
general civl mattrs; each prram is desbe beow:
1 ) Judicial Arti
2) Medaton
3) Th Early Set Pro (ESP) in cojuncton with the
San Franci -Ba Asation.
JUDCIAL ARBITROON
, Deription
In arbtin, a neut.~to pre at a henng whre th part
pr ev thh ex Iand testion. The arbito apie th
law tø th facfs of th ca an maes an aw ba up th me of
. th case. Wh th Court orrs a -cse to arbtin it is ca iudlc
aiOl "1 gol of ar is to provid pa with an adudcaUon
tht is earlier, faer, le forl, and usuaHy le exsive than a trl.
Upon stulaon of alt par, othr cil matter may be submed to
judicial arbtraon..
Alough not currnt a part of th Couits ADR prram, ciil disputes
may also be relv throh private arbn He, th pares
AJ.1 10/er (j)
Pi 4
Exlbit "EO'
Page 34
Exhbit "1"
Page 3 8
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03120/200'
4. '61331 Page 37 of 74
Document
FIRST6-2
voluntariy cot to arbitr. If al pa agre, pr aron may
be bindin and th pa give up th riht to judical re of the
arlts deJø. In prte ar, th pa se a pr
arbittor and are resnsi for payh th attors fee.
Operon
Puruant to COP 1141.11 an Lo Rue 4¡ al ~I ac it whch th .
amunt in co Is $5,00 or le, an no pa se equibl ,
re, shaD be orered to arat. A ca IS ord to ar af
the Ca Managt Cofe An ar is ch fr th
Cos Arn Pan. Mos case oRi to arli are als
order to a pr-arbti se co. Ar are ,
gener he be 7 and 9 mo af a copl ha be fied.
Judic arbitr Is J: bidi un aD part agree to be bond by the
arbtor's dec. Any part ma ret a co trl wi 30 days
afr th arto(s aw has be flied.
Cost
There is no cost to th pa fo judical arbtion or for the pre-
arbtln seem cofernce.
MEDIATION
Deripti
Mediati is a volunta, flble, an confdentil
pros in wh a
nel th pa "mediato faciitte neottins. -Th goa of meiati
is to rea a mu sati ag tht reoles aD or'pa of th
diut af exlo th siifnt inte, nes, an prri of th
pa In ig of re evæ and th la.
Alh th are difert ~Ie and appl'es to me, most ,
meiati ~in wI prons of ea side's vi 'of
th cae. The
meiator's ro Is to asst th par In comunlti wi ea otrf
exes
thr in, unng th inte 9f opng part;
recgnizng areas of agrent and geneting optins for reution.
TIough qu, th meator aids eac part in asseng the stngts
and wea of their poon.
"'5
.A-i 10/0'1 Om)
Exhbit "E"
Page 35
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 39
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
03/20/2Of
FIRST LEGAL
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 38 of 74
,1 161331
A meiator does not prop a judt or provide an evaluation of th
th ca. Many attorey and litnts find that
me an value of
mela's em on cotie di relut pruc mor
satictory an enur resutons. Mediat's nodverrial
apprch is partrl efece in dispu in whlåi th pa have a
conting relaonp, whe ther ar mu pa, whe eqbl
reief is soht. or wh str peal fe $)st
Opn
Sa Fra Supor Co Lol 'Cour Rule 4 prid thre dint
volunta meiati pr fo ci dipues. An apprprte pt
is avabe for aU åv ca rele of the ty of acn or ty of
re soht
To hep li an al id qua meatrs, th Sup ,
Court maintns a li of me prov whos trinng an expce
have ben revi an approved by the Court. The list of court apped
men provi ca be fod at ww.sfv.orco. li are
not 6mile to medator 01' the cour li and may sel any ,meia
agree upo by all pa A me prvid ne not be an at~.
lol Rule 4.2 t; al fo meti in lie of judicl ar, so lo
as the partes file a stula to mete wiin 240 days from th dat th
compt is fi. If &eent is not reachecl-hroh meiation, a ca
pro to tral as scedul.
Prte Medol,
The Priate Meia prra acte ca th wih to
papa in prat meia to fu th courts ai dispue
re reir Th pa seec a meiato" pa of meiatrs or
meti pr of thr chce to cOct the meia. Th co of
, ,
me is bo by th pa eqal unl~ th pa agre
othse.
Par in ciil èa that hae not be orer to arbitrti may coent
to pr meatn at any point before tr. Partes wiUing to'subm a
mat to prate meiaon shul indcae this pr on th ,
Stipulatin to A1eml Di RèSlut fonn or 1h Case Manaen
Sttement (CM-110). Both fo are at to this packet
.... Jolrr Oa)
l' 6
Exlbit "E"
Page 36
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 40
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
FIRST LEGAL
03/20/20(
Nledatin Sence oftha Bar Asciatin of
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 39 of 74
t 161331
Sa Fr
Th MeIaUon Sece is a cordin ef of th San Fracisc
'Supe Court an Th Ba Asstion of San Franc (BA) In wh
a court appved meiato prvid thre ho of meian at no chge
to the part. It is deigne to afor cil
li th op to
engag in ea me of a ca 8h af min th cot. in an
ef to re th mat be sutil ñm ar ex on th
liUon proc. Algh th go of th pr Is to pr th
se at the ou of th lion, th prra ma be utiz at '
an thro th litin pr.
The meia pang In th'pr ha be pr-aprved by Ui
co puant to st edcaon an ex reents.
Af th fl of th sine Stiatin to Alat Dis Resut
form Inc in ths Alpage th pa win be co by BASF.
Upo paym of the $200 per pa adinis fee. pa Seec a
. spec me frm th li of co appved media prviders. Th
hour1 ~ fe beyond th ,fi th hors wil var dein on the
meto sele. Waiv of th administe fee ba on fincial
hardip is avalae.
A co of the Med Seic rues ca be fond a.n th BASF webit
415-782.~.
atww:sfr.or. or
you may cal BASF at
Judcial Medon
Th JuälCai Meat prra is de to provk early meiation of
coplex cases by vote Judge oflh San Fra SU Co.
Cas cosi for th program In coctn de emplymt
disc. prfe mapr, Insuce cover. toxi tor
and in~1 ac.
Par interte in juic meiatn should fi th Stpu to
Alrnate DIe Res fo atch to this paet Inicting a jont
reque for inc in th prra. A prrenc fo a sp jud9~ may
be ind. The cort AJat Die Ren
Conatorwll
coinat asslgnmet'i: ca that qualif for the progr. '
.i-i i./O' 0.)
Pa 7
Exhbit "E"
, Page 37
Exhbit "1"
Page 41
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20/2008
Document
6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
41" '1331 Page 40 of 74
FIRST LEGAL
Cost
Geerally, th cot of Pr Men ra'fr $2 pe ho to $4
pe hour and is sha equally by th pa. Many meia are wlng to
adjust thr fe dep1n upo the Ince and resl' of the part.
appnt a Meia to se at no co to th paes
An pa wh me ~rt elgili reui may as th cort to
, The Media Seic of th Bar Asti of San Fra prides
thre ho of meti ti at no cot wi a $2 pe pa
adnie fee.
Ther Is no ch~ for papation in th Judic Medti prog.
EARLY SET PROGRAM
Deptin
The Ba Asc: of Sa Franci, in cotin wi th Co, offers
an Earl Se Prora ("SP-) as pa of th Cos set
coce caar. Th go of èarl set Is to pr papants
.. , an oprtnit to i- a rn actabl set that rees all
or pa of th di. Th tw-m volunt~ attomey pa re a
banc be plaint and defse at wi alle 10 yea of
tral exprience.
As In meiatin, th ~ no set for for th se coce. A
co tyUy bein wi a bnef me wi all pa an
coun, in whic ea Is given an oprtnit to ma an init stemnt
Th paelis then ass
disng th sts and wes of
th pa in ~ an cadily
th ca. The Ea
seen Con Is coer a .quasiud procng and.
ll, is not ened to the sttory confidenit prteon afrde
, to meiatn.
Opon
Civil ca enter the ESP ei voluntaÌy or throug asignment by the
Court Pares who wi to che the ea seme pr shuld
indicte this prefre on th status- an seng confenc sttement
.i.¡ 10107 (j)
PI 8
Exhbit "E"
Page 38
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 42
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
03/201200l
Page 41 of 74
41r '133
(
If a rn is asne to the ESP by the Cotl pa ma cos.t tle
ESP prra mate acanng th -Noce of th Eary Setut
Confere- fo lñfnn regardln remval fr th program.
Partciants ar notifi of ther ESP confer dat appxiately 4
moth pr to tral. The se QO Is tycaUy he 2 to 3
mont pr to th tral dae. Th Ba As's ESP Coordnat
Infor the pa of nam of the pa me an locn of th .
seWe cofeen app 2 wee pr to the cofece dat.
lo Rul 4.3 se ou th reuire of the ESP. All pa to a ca
asign to th ESP ar req to su a seen conc'
stte pr to th co Al part, atys who w1ß tr th'
case, an in reprntaties wi set au ar reuir
to at the semet cofe. If seer is no rèchd throgh
the confce, the case prces to trl as scUl. .
Cost
All partes must subm a $250 gely rirefuble adminise fe
to the Bar Astion of San Franci. Pares who me certin elibit
reuireent may reue a fe waiv. For mo inon, plse
conta
th ESP Coon~tor at (415) 782.. ex8717.
***... * * **** * * * ** ***
For furter infoaton ab Sa Fraci &ipeor Cour ADR pros
or dIpu retion altatve, pl contact
Surir Go, Altie Dis Reon, .
, 40 Mcst St Roo 103
Sa Franc, CA 94102
, (415)551-3876
or visit th Supior Cour Webe at
htt://sfov.orsielcorl''ag.asp?id=72
AD-i 10/f1 00
P.9.
Exhbit "E"
Page 39
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 43
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03120/2001l
Document
6-2
41' '\1331 Page 42 of 74
FIRST
SUPERIOR COURT OF CAUFORNIA
COUNT OF SAN FRANC~CO
400 McAte Sl Sa Fn. CA 94102-414
Case No.
Plint
8nPUTI TO ALTETI
DIS REsoON
Y.
De
Th pa IM sUpai.. th this ac .. .. .ub to th foUowl a1 dis
reluton pnes:
(J
(J
o
i:
o
Pr li 0
Jl
Meiaon Ser of BAF 0 Julcal Melatfon
Bing arllon
Nodlø ..CUCiai aib..tI
BA Ea 8e Pr ,
Judge
OI ADR Pr (de,u)
Pllntlffs) an Decls) fl agre as folow
Nam ofParb S1lang
D PI 0 Di
Nl of Pa ~lall
CJ P1alnf 0 ' De'
Name of Part StIlati
o Pliilf 0 Defade
Nl atPai or Al &e SI Slgabn of Par or Ati'
o Cl' Da
o Cn Ol
Na at Pa or A\ Ex Slilati Slati at Par or AU
Na 0( Pa or At Ex S18ln . SIgn of Pa or At
o Cni- De
. 0 Add sis) atld
ADR~ 31
STIPULATION TO AlTENATI DISPUTE REOLUlON
Exlbit "E"
Page 40
Exhbit "1"
Page 44
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
03f20/20011
Page 43 of 74
41" ~1331
-
CM-110
AYORI'NrWIOU AlTOl"" _ar~..
RI CO uillr
f-
"'o\lC~
i;__mDllll~
Ad
AlT FOR (Hom
Il .I
ii~
0£~: CA. II STATE
SV COT Of CA CO OF
~
i: Nf2I CO
-i ii
(Clk on):
CJ
(Adl
UN CA
el ..00)
ClCAl-CA
\fid Is $200
orle)
A CAse MAGE CON ii $t.. l.
Dat
De:
li
Ad
of
CI II
Dil.:
cort (idi ~ th Bd ~J:
Roo:
:
INSlRucON8: AIlippllla boxe mi- bell and ih sp Wormn mu be pnde
1. Pa or i- '(lIonJ;
L 0 Thslluubmlll8brp¡(l-):
b. CJ T1 tI Is 1I.i bi pa (1l):
2.a,Cøan
cr-c (10'" ai byp/an CIplon
Th cot wi li on (d): .
b. 0 Th c:~ii if ii. wa lI,on (da):
3. 5I lI be BI by pIlI ~ on)
.. 0 AI pa i- In ih Cl -i ~iI ha be ee, or ha II or hae li dli
b. 0 1I~pdl1ln"~or~
(1) D have no be $l (ai nlll eKp iW no:
(2) CJ 11 l- II buli no Ip -i li no be di (sp 1/):
(3) CJ ha Ii 8 de en ag tI (s nø
c. 0 Th ii iil pe ma be ad (sp names nil of fn fn C8. tl th date by'tM
fheymay be ætd):
4. a~on
ly orca.
fl ca 0In ca
F"'eii:
cullO...i1.2l
o tIt
(dsa, in C8 of ac):
CAE MANAGe STAlE
.. hr.
ca .. CCCl
_3.no
"lX~Wr"
i=-~~i
Exlbit "E"
Page 41
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 45
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20/2001'
Document
6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
41R'"l61331 Page 44 of 74
FIRST LEGAL
eM.ii0
icm~
bDEENDANIRPO;
PLANTFFIP
I
d8cI
In melJ lD æ. li.. en am fMfu tr-i, iø
-i to da. il.. fu lo ci "ea refs ao ØN.. na clih re
In an da (f #* /i ct.. ~ iI lb ti an
4. b. Pnivl a bc ti oI1h ea
c: (I mo sp Ia nc ch IhIø an al. pf ~ ItsAl 4b.J '
5. Ju or Mn tr
Th i- or pi n: D . jw lll CJ a no ti (I tI Ih on pi, pt IJ n/l oi.ac pt
Il . ju 1r:
6. Tri dabt
a. c: Th t.aI ha be ri fo (datiJ; ,
b. CJ No tñal da ha been se Th ç,,Wi be rey brlr wa 12 moUi ofll date
of
Ih lig ofthCDalnl (i
111, exp/):
c. Oa on wh pa or at wi not be ave fo tr ($p dal9S im ei /M fo unvaJ:.
7. EsII le of tr
TI pai or pai es lh It trl wi ta (c on):
a. 0 dt (li 1I:
b. Cl ho (sh ca) (ø
8. Tri nitall (1 be lI forea ~
a.
AI
b. Fi
Tho par or plii1 wi be ien1 allrl 0 by th at or pa II In li ca
o by Uie ii:
c. Ad
d. Telephon num
e. Fax num
f. E- add:
g. Pa re:
D AiIl re Is de In Atcl ~.
9.o Pn-i
'
This ca Is en to pice (sp c: se):
10.
AItie~RM(AR)
,
re ADR qi wi .. cf , .
a. CO c: ha c: hi no pr lI AD Inim pa ld In ni 3.1 to 8I clt ii baa
b. 0 Al pa ba ag to a fa or AD AD wi be ~ by (óaJ;
Co D The ea ha ci to an AD pr (l *us
c:I10...i 1.:I
CASE MANAGEI STAl'
..hl 4
.....~
Exhbit "E"
Page 42
Exhbit "1"
Page 46
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 45 of 74
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 47
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 46 of 74
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 48
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
03/20/200'
Page 47 of 74
41" ~6I33I
~-i . . 1-- CM11.1
10. d. Th B orpa ... wi to ~ In (c: II"" -t:
(1) Me
(2) , Na ji ai un Co of CM Prii ~ 11.1.12 (dlry to cl 15 da bebi
ai lICø Ru of
Co iule 3.82
Co
(3) CJ Nòl1nju8l un
of Cll Pi&e 1141.12 (disYSry
to re op lI51
be ti oi re un ea. Rule of Coi iu1e 3.82
aD
da
(4)
CJ B/ ju ai '
(5) c: BI pr" -l
(6) ci Necaavua
(7)
0 OI($:
e. D TI ma. su to ni-ld ju id be Ih an In i::; no exci Il stll li
Pi se 11.1.11.' ,
t c: Plli eI ti ra lh c: lD )J 8l an N- to Im re 10 fle 11 sp In Co of CI
g. 0 Th.. Is ei frjucØ ii UInio 3.11 ofll Cï Ruaf Co (sp.emp
11. Setlnt coce
CJ Th pa orpaiturewing to pa.in an ease c;ii (sp wh):
12. lnsu
8. D lninnc ca. If any, fa fi fi this llemnl (nam):
b. Re of ri CJ Yes CJ No
c. 0 Co Is wi slgnl ;a Rl of Ih ca (ØI:
13. Jull
, ,
In .Y it IJ ma aff 1h i:t ju or f.1n of ibis ca, II äe th stlu
CJ Ba D Ol (il
Sts: .
14. Rela ca, colk ud coo
ii c: 1b an oi un or æI ca.
(1) NI of ca
(2 NI of cc
(3) c. nu
(.) SC
D Ad ca ar ci In Al 1...
b. CJ A mi to Cl cx C1 CO WI. be ii by (na pa):
15. al
D The pa or paln to fi ø mo fo an aibl, ~g. or cordin th ro Iss or ca of
ICn (8f movi pa tn of~ an INs): ,
16, Ot moon
o Th pa orpa ei to li Ih folow moll ba til (spçl mOV paff (y of moUo, an /us):
Ql1l0\l...it,-i
CASE MAGEM STATE
..ii:iol.
Exhibit "E"
Page 43
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 49
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
F1RST LEGAL
03/201200
Filed 03/31/2008
4 61331 Page 48 of 74
CM110
17.D~ '
I~-
CEANIR;
G
AN~~
I
fm De ll
a 0 Th ~ or pa ha ood il dI.
b. 0 lb. fólow ~ wl be co by ti d8 sp (d- ll an df):
ç, CJ Th fo dÎ Is al8 anii (spJ:
18. Ec U1p1OA ' ,
Is IiI1 ci cu (La, th -i de II $2 or Ie an li ii Ii prui In Co
b. CJ Th Is ali ci cu -i . ~ towl th C8 to theóa II pr or fo ad
, 8. CJ Th
'01 CI Pr.. 91 th 98.... ~ 11 i- .
di
wI be fI N ~ ex sply wh 8l It p¡ ie ro di or Id
sh no ap 10 tI ca):
19. Oterluue
o Th pe or pa ie ih tt fong additional mail be consider Qr deleed allh ease ma
, coff tscI
20. lIand conl'r .
Of Co (I no oa ,
a 0 11 pi or pa ha met an c: -M al p8 tl aU &U reie by ru 3..724 of Ui CimI Rul
b. Al meti and c: iiie by NI 3.724 oflh Ca RuofCow th pa ii on ih fo
(8p
. 21. CløinalJOn
Pi ci ma oi In" ta .. (di øn): D no D aii as Al21.
22 Toll nu or pa atdi N any):
18m ~ ra wi Uii- -wi be Yy pr to -i.. li Il of d/ lI AD .. we as ol Is
ni I1 \h ii an wi po Ih IU to ll Jn dp on th Is It th li of ih ca mat
ccl',1r lhwi aI oftl JØ vm re
Da: '
.
.
lM ORPl ~
(JÎ; OR Pl /i
-l'Na' /W OIAtrON
iiQI/W OI Am
o Ad s/ 818 allch
Clll0\I. .iI,2O
CAS MA 8TATE
i
\,',-,.
..hU ,
(,
~.... .
Exhibit "E"
Page 44
Exhbit "1"
Page 50
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
FIRST LEGAL
03120/200'
Filed 03/31/2008
4 j 133\ Page 49 of 74
Superior Court of Calorna.
County of San Frandsc
li DAVID BA Tl
PRJUD
Judicial Mediation Progr
JEN B. AlAR
AIlI'
~1O
Th Judcia Medon pr of meaton of coplex civliga by a
th la th is th suec
Sa Frais SU Cour
of
ju failjAl wi th ar of
th COver. Ca th wi be code for paci in th prgr
inlu bu ar no lite to pioæ mace CO employm
, ince cover diut mi to an colex co li Jud
medon offer civli th opty to en in ea medon of a ca
shor af fitb C0plSÏ in an ef to reve th in be su~ ,
. :f ar ex 'I pr may al be ut1i'7 at 8D thgh th
liga pr. Th pal of jud c:tl paci in th pr inlues:
The Honorble Jam J. McBrde .
The Honorale Daid 1. Balla
The Hora1e Ane Bo
Tho Honorble Kein M. McCy
Th Hao Robe i. Do
Th Ho Rod Qudacy
The Honle Blco Cb
Th Hoo Jo B. MUD
Th Hoble Bm H. 00
Th Holi A.lam Ro n
The Honble Hald E. Ka
Th.Hoorale Patr 1. Maney
Th Honle Toma MlI
Pares ind in
Tho Hoolc Jo K. St
Th HooorJc Mar B. W'IS
judia meian shul:fe th Stion to A1e
Diute Reoluton fo at to di pake indicag a jol re for inluon
in th prgr and delier à cour coy to De 212. A piJeu;lIJO for a spif
ju may be in' 'I cour .Ae Diut Reluton Prgr
Ad wi tàll1Ø 8Sgoen of oa 1h qu for th prgr
Note: Space is li Suon of a stpulon to judcia meti do not
gu inlusion in tle prgr You wi re wr notion fr 1he
com as to th outcome of
you aplicaon. .
Supor Cour Ale Dite Re1.on
400 McA s~ Roo 103, Sa Frais, CA 94102
(415) 5SI.3816
i 010 (iii)
Exhbit "E"
Page 45
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 51
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/201200'
DocumentFIRST
Page 50 of 74
4 :'1331
the Stars
2 2121 Avenue of
Suite 2800
3 Los Angeles, CA 90067
Phone: 310.734.3200
4 Fax: 310.734.3300
Email: jswenson~tetoe.com
5
Attorneys for Defendant Red Door Salons, Inc.
6
7
8
I, Sus Haa, declare and state as follows:
20
21
1.
I am employed by Elizabeth Arden Spas, LLC as the Director of Benefits and
22 HRS ("Human Resource Information Systems") in Phoenx, Arzona. Red Door Salons, Inc.
23 ("Red Door") is a wholly-owned subsidiar of Elizabeth Arden Spas, LLC. I am a cutodian of
24 records peraining to benefits and human resources matter for Red Door. I have personal
25 knowledge of the foregoing, or knowledge based upon corporate recrds which are withn my
26
27
EXHIBIT f
28
(No. )
DECLARTION OF SUSAN BAAS
1
Exhbit "F '
Page 4
t:r:"f1'-r:
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 52
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03
1
2.
Document 6-2
f20/2O()'
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 51 of 74
4' '61331
FIRST LEGAL
I am informed and believe Plaintiffs have fied a Complaint against Red Door in
2 which they seek, among other things, payment for wages and overtime they allegedly worked and
3 for which Red Door allegedly did not pay them.
4
3.
Red Door was at the time of the filing of this action, and remains, a corporation
5 incorporated under the laws of the State of Amona with its principal place of busines in Arizona.
6
4.
During the entire course of their employment with Red Dor, Plaintiffs were
7 employed in the Stat of California, Plaintiff Usa Knight provided Red Door with addresss
8 located in Concord and San Francisc, California as the location at which she elected to receive
9 communications from Red Dor during her employment. Plaintiff Marcie Dave provided Red
10 Door with an address locted in MiUbrae, California as the location at which she elected to receive
11 communications from Red Door durig her employment.
12
5.
I have reviewed Red Door's corprae records. dating back to 2004, and have
13 determined the following:
14 a. In 200, Lisa Knght's gross income wa approximately $21,557.38.
15 b. In 2005, Lisa Knight's gross incme was approximately $2 i ,054.56.
16 c. In 2006, Lisa Knight's gross income was approximately $24,940.45.
17 d. During her tenure at Red Door, Lisa Knight was paid bi-weekly,
18 e, The amount of revenue Lisa Knight generated in 2007 was approximately
19 $44,250.47.
20 f. Red Door has employed approximately 79 different "hait' stylists, aestheticians,
21 masseuses, or any similar commissioned workers" at its saon located at 126
22 Post Street, in the city of San Francisc, California, since 20.
23 g. Red Door ha employed over 100 different "hair stylists, aestheticians,
24 masseuses, or any simlar commissioned workers" in the State of Califomia,
25 since 200.
26
27
28
(No. )
2
DECLARATION OF SUSAN HAS
Ex.bit "F"
Page 47 \
Exhbit "1"
Page 53
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 52 of 74
4' ~6133i
FIRST LEGAL
03/20/200P
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Arizona and the United
2 States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.
3
Executed this 18Ui day of March, 208 in Phoenix, Arizona.
4
5
.,l¿¡Ó/h i/æi.-(
6
Susan Haas
7
8
9
day of tt~ , 2008.
10
~=~_..
11
12
"'CH A. Bl
My Commission Expires:
~ili-i-fj1t1
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
DECLARATION OF SUSAN HAAS
(No.
L
Exhibit "F"
Page 48
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 54
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
4
FIRST LEGAL
03/20!2()
Page 53 of 74
:;1331
CIVIL COVER SHEET
". i.. l,¡ ,lo.-,'.I:i.:1li)I":;,mif,I;\'I.li,.I:lri:
n....i~ -l; çjVI~ L,.\\t'l :öhc:\. t1ni: 11", m'ormiini: cOI\taio-~ '1~~lO ncrti reploce Mr !t-Uppi:I1lIll ihe riling lU-' strVlCc of plt.'.adillg or l:lth~rJ\"pc us n.qtùrcd ('y taw. t'xc;;pt (i~ lWCh'lcJd
0)' 1',,,1 ivie' nfeiin. 'lhis ¡Mil, 01'l'(vtC by ,he J..ical C",i(erenç~ of.he I iOled 5101., in Sci~.(nber 1914, is lIQlired lor ihe I~C, ~rtl CI.r. ofC"u~ iiir ihe (iUrp'"'' ,,0' iliii~I,,S
~'" C;i'¡ dtJ~.. .hci (SEr INSiRlKTIONS ON l'GE TWO OFTI'II:: FORM, i
i. (a) I'LAINTlFFS DEFENDANTS
Li,~ Knigh' and Marcie Dave, on behalf of themselves And all others Red Door Salons. Inç,. cl al.
similarly.illlRleI
COUll1y ur Reid."" of Firs UJ,ed o.rend
(IN U,S. Pl.lNTIFI' CASES ONL.V)
(h) Counl)'or~idc=ofFil$ usie Plainrlf
(EXCEPT IN u.s, PLAINTlfl CASES)
NOTE: INLANOCONOENATlONCASfS USE
lAND INVOLVED,
Tim I.oC~T10"nrTHF.
Anonie (If KIlOwn)
(c) Iiiion\C~", (Finn Nom:, Addr.",.nd Telephone Numbrl
i
John P. Swenson. Steptoe & Johnson LLP
2121 Avcmic of the Sws. Suile 2800
Michnel von Loewenfeldi and Michael Ng. Keri & Wagstaffe. LLP, f 00
5rir Stree. 51. 1800. San Fi.."cisc. CA 94105-1528; and
Gary £. Moss, Mary Patrcia Hough and Derek LV, Tho. Law Off~ of
-':,
. 'j
Lo Angele. CA 907
Mo,,' & Hough. 601 Vaii Nes .~ve., Sie, 2030, Sail Francisco. CA 94102
,
in. CITIZENSHI OF PRICIPAL l ARTl (1'1....")( ¡.(lnella, r.. p~(.,irr
II. BASJS OF JURISDICI0N (PI.....')( in 0.. Bo. Onl))
01
01
(For Diveii¡y ea Ony) 'Oid On i.. ¡N r.~.JiIiI
f' OEF PT DF.F
li'i...fTlúSi (i i 0 I 1....ponial.,Prlip.IPb O. D 4
o ;; F...i
Q.io
(US, G._merv Nol. I'atl
u.s. GO\'Clltmcl
l1am,¡rr
ll$ aOWllm1Cul
i: ~
l)c(tqdiinf
",rOøsiaCSf fA Tliis 51_
('li .r ....lhC SlIte 0 2 0 2
Oi...ít
Os
IlllPoi lied turd PriCJal lli-c:
(1m:lice.Cteizc,h,)øfl1,,"i iu ltcmlll)
ofßiii4csl- In I\nthC\ SC;ie
in ,
0- O.
Cl.. or S.bjo or. 0 ~ 0 i forill to'all
For.. COUl""
iv. NA TIRE OF SUI (1'1""..-)(- ..0.. Bo.OnI
FO.RllITREENAI,'lY
CON-lRACT
OTU£R ST ATlITlt
40 !iUifC RCõMtÌlUH~ØtI
410 AoIi.
6\0 Iiio,"c
o "Olti¡:ur~e
620 Olba foo .. 0,,'5
CJ 11U Mi'llilÇ .
CJ no Mille ~çr
D 1-t0 Nt¡lialc Ini;lnial(;
c: I$ORoc"efy(\r~"Il1~1l
& i:ofon...f lll.icl
62S Dm Itii... S.,..
430 iii. anll_.kin
.r""y 11 use 8&1
6JOLii, La..
.UO(".o..uia
~60 Dc..
IVO Itll & l....
no R..GI..IIiII".. im
CJ ISIRa:...rDcll.I'od
Slidcid lAnI'
66~io
S.ro¥H..I,h
~IO C"",,(,'od.
4l(,llle iv
6901..
CJ 160 SlokM'dc,,' S..
71 n f.~ i.ol Siiiid,
I7SClImcr(:hlcIp:
CJ laS C....i ProOO I.i.bmiy
196 fl'nciå;c
720 i... It .i....
890lba Smut ""ions
731 i.liiiR.cpm&
l91 Iib...I,-\
_sr
IS ScielCoimioò iC$
LfiOR
""
o l'IOIb..,...,oc,
12 use )4~,
o 2101..ld("Diit&~l\i0Il
CJ iio For..mi
L~-kl
m &onuiic SIi"i1ii:Iløn Aci
4 Dilo ,.
m¡AL I'ROPFlnì'
,..-.
aloSos..j:
(f~\:i: VÇlc:~)
i: tB R=..,.rO""ii...
ørVaerrls Boneriu
'. ,i.~
C~QI\Ìlicl.
650 ....I.. R..
CJ ISL M..i:..,,
740 RaiiVI Li "'
1'3 ênvirøl M..Cl~
7' O'bcr Li UI¡¡ic.
89 EilC Iilln l.
791 e",pl R.,loç,
895 frøm..r lnfnnniMiiul
\i'
,,,
S""Ìl ki
CJ no R.Clll l. It EF1tnenl
ï -.1
9OApot.rF..
UainiinQliø
CJ 2-OTorsioLand
c: i.¡s Tot' Pro"" Uibi~'i'
UodSq..il\
lMGRATlN
lø Ju
~
-u.., Ap
ol_('_-
i: 2'AIIOIb;rR..pluply
qSO Cmuiitutiitfiirøy flf
Smic $tui
Alien DeniilC
.UOlII"-IIJIIa
k1:ÒlVi
V. ORIGIN
W~iç... -x. .,0... 80, o.ly)
2 Reved l\om CJ i Re".nd from
CJ i OiiQi roitCE
lraçceding
Sioie Cuiin Appellatc eii"n
Apl ,. Di-ik:!
Trinstëd from
CJ 4 lleiinued or i: s aro~' distri
Riopene (s¡ilj)
CJ 6 Mlilridi$iriCl
I,Atigation
CJ 7 Judge ITm
Mo!li,n'"
Iud incnl
Cilo Uie U,S, Civil SUtute under which YOlI1 filing (1)0 nol tUr j~dlcllnal.lat\ll.$ vnles.. diniilly);
28 u,s,c. Sens 1332 a, d, l441 and 1446
VI. CAUSE OF ACTON Brierclcrn ofCliie:
Class acn complaint alløgin Failur 10
Vrr-REQUEED rN m CHECK ir niis IS A CLAS ACTON DEMAD $ unspecfied CHECK YES \lill ildem¡ixlcd in coilplainr
COMPLA: UNDER F,R,C,P, 23 JUlIY DEMAND: CE YcsCJ No
VrI. !tELA TED O\SE(Sl PLEA REFE TO CI LA ).12 CONCERING REQUIREMENT TO F1
IF ANY 'NOTICE OF RELA TIlD CASE'. None
LX, OIVISIONAt ASSIGl''MENT (aVil. L.It 3-2)
(I'LACEAND 'X' IN ONE BOX ONLY) CJ SAN JOSE
DliTf.
3
Exhbit "1"
Page 55
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 54 of 74
4 '')61331.
FIRST LEGAL
031201200'-
~l9A
~q¡~
lt., ~C~ fl
-141Wl1 N
~~ .
~ ío ~i. . 1~6'
John Swenson (SaN 2241 10)
4Ir~..
the Stas
2 2121 Avenue of
Suite 2800
E-fiing "'
I
i
I
¡
Phone: 310.734.3200
4 Fax: 310.734.3300
I.
Email: jswenson§gteptoe.com
¡
5
Attorneys for Defendat Red Door Salons, Inc.
I
6
i
i
7
UNTED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
NORTIERN DISTRCT OF CALIFORNIA
I
j
9 LISA KNIGHT and MACIE DA VB, on ev 0 8
i 0 situated, )
behalf of
themselves and aU other simlarly) Case No.
)
sc
1520
(San Francisco County Superior Cour I
Case No. CGC-08-471683)
r~:i
12 vs.
)
)
)
CERTICATION OF INTERETEn¡
i."';
i 3 RED DOOR SALONS, INC., an Arzona
Corpration and DOES 1 thrugh 25,
14 inclusive,
)
)
)
)
ENTITIES OR PERSONS I
Plaitiffs,
1i
Defendants,
15
)
)
-/~ ....
t".;
: .....t
1",1
'.'~.,'
:. .t
Action Filed: Janua 31,2008
I' "J
i
~'
)
16
17
Purant to Civil L.R. 3-16, the undersigned certifies that the following coiporations have
a fi~ancia1 interest in the subject matter in controvery odn a par to the procing, or have a
18
non-fiancial interest in the subjec matter in controvery
19
affected by the outcome of
this
or in a par tht could be'substatially
,proceing:
20
Red Door Salons, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiar of
21
22
Elizaeth Aren Spas, L.L.C.
, Elizaeth Arden Spas, L.L.C. is a wholly-owned subsidiar of Elizabet Arden Salon-Holdin,
Inc.
23
24
25
26
27
28
~o. )
CERTIFICATION OF INTERSTED EN1TS
5528Ô9
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 56
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
03/20/2()'
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 55 of 74
4' SI3!
FIRST LEGAL '
March, 2008.
RESPECTFLY SUBMrITD ths -B day of
STETOE & JO LLP
2
3
4
I,
venue oftbe Sta, 28th Floor
5
I
I
6
I
7
geles, Californa 90067
Attrneys of
Recrd for Defendant
j
i
i
8
I
9
10
i1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
,19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(No. )
CERTIFCATION OF INTERETED ENTIE
2
55200
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 57
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20/2001'
4' '''61331 Page 56 of 74
FIRST
'
Document
6-2LEGALFiled
03/31/2008
Oh
~~n
'~N e~~~
2 2121 Avenue of
-t~&.~Ck /.,9
the Stars
Suite 2800
~4'.9 ~.i'' 1f 100&
~~.~
Phone: 310.734.3200
.. hing ~c.~
'~,
4 Fax: 310.734.3300
Emml: jswenso~steptoe.com
5
i,
E f'i' ..~o)-~~
Attrneys for Defendant Red Door Sa1ons, Inc.
s
6
7
UNTED STATES DISTRCT COURT
8
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN
to situted, )
9 LISA KNIGHT and MARCIE 'DAVE, on ) eii 0 8
~-
themselves and all other simiarly) Cle No.
behalf of
1380
) (San Francisco Cowity Superor Cour
Plaitiffs,
11
12 vs.
) Case No. CGC-08-471683)
)
) CORPORATE DISCLOSURE
13 RED DOOR SALONS, INC., an Arzona
Corpration and DOES 1 thugh 25,
14 inclusive,
j STATEMENT
~ Action Filed: Januar 31,2008
)
15
Defendants.
)
~
~
l1
~
)
16
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1, Defendat Red Door Salons, Inc. states tht Red Door
17
Salons, Inc. is a wholly-ownedsubsidiar of
Elizabeth Arden Spas. L.L.C. Elizabeth Arden Spas,
18
L.L.C. is a wholly-owned subsidiar of Elizabet Arden Salon-Holdins, Inc. None of these
19
the public.
companies has any outstanding secties in the hads of
20
RESPECTFUlY SUBMITED ths 19th
21
day
of
March, 2008.
STEP1\OE & JO N LLP
22
By
Jo
212
Los
23
24
,
25
Attorneys for Defendant
26
27
(No. )
1
28 CORPRATE DISCLOSURE STATENT
:¡52B08
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 58
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
03/20/200f'
Page 57 of 74
41 'í1331
Of: Ir'
¡:1!~r~AI
i.ED ...
1111/( J
LISA
KNGHT,
0. fllCHA
_ fj 2011
No, c 08-1520~~
&."'&:f~~
Plaintiff (s),
_ .. ORDERSETTINGIN~~E~ 'liin§)ANAGEMEm:CON;ÊRi~
v.
RED DOOR SALONS INC,
Defendant(s).
AN ADR DEADLINES
IT is HEREBY ORDERED that this action is assigned to the Honorale Samuel Conti.
When serving the complaint or notice of removal, the plaintiff or removing defendat must serve on all
other paies a copy of this order and all other documents specified in Civil Local Rule 4-2. Counsl
must comply with the case schedule listed below unless the Cour otherwise orders.
IT is FUTHER ORDERED that ths action is assigned to the Alternative Dispute Resolution
(A DR) Multi-Option Program governed by ADR Lol Rule ~. Counsel and clients shall familarze
themselves with that rule and with the material entitled "Dispute Resolution Procdures in th Northern
District of
California" on the Court ADR Internet site at ww.adr.cand.usoour.gov.Alimited
printed copies are available frm the Clerk's Offce for pares in cases not subject to the
number of
court's Electronic Case Filing progrm (ECF).
CASE SCHEDULE -ADR MULTI-OPTION PROGRA
Date Event Governing Rule
--------------~------------------------------------------------------------------------------3119/2008
6/20/2008
Notice of removal fiOO
*Lat day to:
. meet and confer re: initial disclosures, ealy
FRCivP 26(1) & ADR
L.R.3-5
settlement, ADR process selection, and discovery plan
· file Joint ADR Certification with Stipulation to ADR Civil L.R. 16-8
Process or Notice of
Need for ADR Phone
Conference
7/7/2008
*Last day to fie Rule 26(f) Report complete initial
disclosures or state objection in Rule 26(1) Report and fie
FRCivP 26(a) (n
Civil L.R. i 6-9
Case Management Statement per athed Standing Order
re Contents of Joint Case Management Statement (also
available at btt://www.cand.uscourt.gov)
7/1112008
INTIAL CASE MAAGEMENT CONFERECE
(CMC) in Ctr i, 17th Floor, SF at i 0:00 AM
Civil L.R. 16- 10
* If the Initial Case Management Conference is continued, the other deadlines are continued
accordingly.
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 59
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed, ,03/31/2008
,', ,..4' '11331,
Page 58 of 74
FIRST LEGAL "
031201200P
, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
1
2
3
4 CASE NO.
5 ORDER SETING CAE ,MAAGEMEN CONF:ERENCE
.
6 This action having been assigned to Judge Samuel Conti,
7 IT is ORDERD that a conference wili be held ,before Judge
8
at 10; 00 A.M. in the United
Conti on
9 States Courthouse, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco,
'10
California .
11 The parties shall appear in person or through counsel and
12 shall be prepared to discuss the future course of the
13 litigation including, but not limited to, matters set forth
14 in civil Local Rule .16-10. Parties, are to file a written case
.'
15 management statement at least 10 days before said hearing date.
J6, The parties are required to
comply with the provisions
'17 of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, Civil Local Rules 16-3 to .
18 16-10 (patent cases sho~id comply ~ith Patent Local Rule),
19
including, but' not limited to, the following reqnirements:
1()'
1. The parties must meet and confer no less thàn 21
2l-
days prior to the initial' case management
,conference.
22
2. The parties must devise a discovery plan and submit
23
it, ,jointly, no less than 7 days prior to the '
case managernent conference. The parties shall
24
submit a propOsed order embodying
the term of the
discovery plan at the status conference.
25
26
27
3. At the "meet and confer" con,ference referenced in
paragraph 1, above, the parties shall discuss
~hether and to what extent they shall make the
kinds of "disclosures" contemplated in Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure. The parties ,shall report to the
28
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 60
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20/200"
DocumentFIRST
Page 59 of 74
41 'í1331
Court the results of this disçussion, in their case
management conference statement_
2
Following the conference, appropriate orders will be
3
entered regulating and controlling fnture proceedipgs in the case.
4'
PLAINTIFF is DIRlCTED TO SERVE COPIES OF THlS ORDER AT
5
ONCE UPN ALL
PARTIES TO THIS ACTION AN UPN THOSE
6
SUBEQUEY JOINED IN ACcORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF RULES 4
7
AND 5, FEDER
RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. and to file with the
8
Clerk of the Court a certificate reflecting such serVice.
9
FOR TH COUR'r:,
10
Richard W. Wieking. Clerk
11
)2
By:
13
Deputy Clerk
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
"
21
22
23
IMPORTANT:
'24'
SEE ATTACHED ORDER RE TIMELY FILING OF PLEAINGS. BRIEFS. AN
25' MOTIONS CAENAR' AN ELECONIC CASE FILING:
26' Judge Conti i s Law and Motion Calendar
is held at 10:00 A.M..i Fridays.
27
28
:?
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 61
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
03/20/200l
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 60 of 74
4' '61331
fIRST LEGAL
NOTICE TO ALL ATTORNYS:
J
2
J
4'
$
6
7
,8'
9'
10
ii
, BRIEFS. MOTIONS, ETC.
ORDER RE TIMELy FILING OF PLEADINGS,
It has been noted by tbe court that mâny attorneys are not
filing their pleadings and briefs within the time speci.fied in the
Local Rules, nor in the manner or form required. Specifically,
many attorneys have filed briefs and memoranda in excess of
twenty-five (25) pages, without leave of court. Said practice
violates Civil Local Rule 7-4 (b) .
By addressing this order to you, the court does not infer
that rou or any membr of your firm adheres to this practice, but
rather seeks to put all attorneys on notice:
Any pleading' or brief, hereafter sought to be filed with the
12
court after the required time, or in an improper manner or form,
13
14
15
J6
17
shall not be received or considered by the, court. Any attorney in
violation of these requirements will be subject to other sanctions
pursuant to Civil' Loal Rule 1-4.
,RE ELECTONIC CASE FILING:
In all cases that have been assigned
to the Electronic Case Filing System, the parties are required to
18,
19
20
21,
22
23
provide one paper copy of each document that is filed electronically for use in chambers.
be delivered no later than noon on the
The paper copy of 'each' docment shall
'day after
filed electronically. Delivery shall be made directly to Judge
Cont i 's chambrs.
RE MOTIONS: All pleadings relating to all motions should
24
25
26
27
28
the document is
be
complete as to briefing and argument l as the court will decide the
issues therein wi thout oral argument l unless otherwise ordered by
the Judge. when this occurs, the court will notify the parti~s
that they need to appear_ (Civil Local Rule 7-6)
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 62
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03120/2001
41 '')1331 Page 61 of 74
Document
6-2
FIRST
S' ANDJNG ORER FOR ALL JlGES OF 11E NORTIRN ÐJsTiUcr 9F
CAL)FO~lA
CONTS OF JOJNT-CASEMAAGEMENT STATEMET
the Noren Disrit ofCaJifomia wjJ rere the
.c~cig Matdi J~ 2007~àiljudge of
identícal infoiatkm in'Joint Cae Mangemt Sta1eits filed pusut to Civil Lol Rule
iÓ'9. The paies mus includ the-following inomiation in i.jr ~temenl which, excep in .
lÌusUay (;oríplex ca shld not excee ten pages:
ì. Jurisdction an Seice: The basis for the court's subject matter jwisdiciion over
pJaii1ifls claim an defents Cbterclaims. whether ;my iss existregarding ptaJ
junsdidn or vene, ~th any pares rem to be sered~ an, if any partes'rein to be
'sered, a propo deJin for serce.
the facts and a sttement of the pnncipaJ factal
2. ~: A brief chrnôlogy of
issueS in dispute.
3. Le~al is: A bnef statement, witht exteml legal arguent, of the disputed pOints
.ofJaw, inludig refer~ to spific statutes an deisions.
4. Motons: AUpóor and:
pending motions, tbeir current statu and any aiticipted mo~OD.
5. Amt ofPl~: The extent to which pinies, claim, or defense are expeted to
-be ad or dismssed and a pro deine for amending the pleaiiigs.
6. Evidee PiatÍO Steps taen to prese evide relevant to th is ~Oß3b
: evidt in ths acton~ iJg interdiction or;my doment-d~ion prog an any
òngoing errt ,òf e-ails. voice mails, an othr elecronicall)recrde maeraJ.
7, , Dislos Wb thee ba been full80 timly. colì,8ßce yñ1h th initial dislosu
Fed R. Civ. P. 26 and a desplion of~ dislos mad.
reqø-emtS of
8. pisvei ~scvei taen 10 date, if any, th scope of anticipated discovery, ..oy
propose limitations or ~odjfications of the discovery roles, and a proposed discover plan
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(1).
9. Clas ACbons: If a class action, à propol for bow and when tbe class wjJ be' certified.
LO,' Relaied Cases: Any related caes or proceedings peding before another judge o( this
cour or before anoler cou or admiiistrtive boy.
1 J, Relief:' All relief sought ,through complaint or counterclaim. iDcluding the amount or any
-1-
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 63
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
03/2012001l
41 '1131
Page 62 of 74
damâKes sought al)d a ,description Qf th baes 9J whic -dges aie cacUlated. bi addition any
p~rt from Wh9m damage are ,sought-mus debe the bas on whicb it conlends damages
should be calcuiated~ if ¡iability is estabJised,
J 2. ~uiement an ADR: Pr~ts for selemt, ADR effott to dat~ and a spific ~R
. plan ,for ta case, inc,ÌUg colian with ADR LR~' 3-5 ar a destion ofJcey discoveiy or
rotiODS necesry. tø position the paes'to neotate a rnJ\iion.
)3, Consent to Ma~teJucleFQt AU Pues: Wbether,aIJ paies wiJJ consnt to håve a
magistrate juge contil all fiher predgs inluing tral and en of judgment.
. 14. Ot Referen: Wbel th ca is suitale for reference In binding, arilfation, a
spiäl maer, or the Judcial Pàn on MuJtidict Litíg~t¡OD.
15. Nanwjn~ ofJs: Isses th can be naowed by agreent or by motion, suggestion
to expedite the p~entation of evdence at tral (e.g., though summes or stipulated facls), and
åny requet ,to bifucate .ies, claims, or defen.
16. Expeited Schele: Wheth this is t1 ty of cae lht ca be hanle on an expedited
bass with ~eamlioed procdues.
.17. Scbed~: Propo dates for designtion of experts. discovei cuoff heang of
dispitive motions~ prtial coference an tr.
18. Trial: Whther the ca wiJ be tred 10 a jur or to the co and th~ expected length of
the tral.
. i 9. DisJoe ofNoo-P3l.ter Eititil¡' or Pmons Whea pa ha filed th
"Cerfication orlieres Enties or Pmons require by Civil Lo Rule 3..16. In ~drolioDr
,~cb,pai must :resta in th ca ~geme.t slatement the contents of
its çafition by
identifyig ány'pens. fi~ paisip, ~tiQD (inclg pat coratiri) or ot.
entiti knwn by th par' to hae eith: (i) a ,fial ÏDei in ib sullèc ma in
,çOooover or in a pa to th prng; or (ii) aly et kind 'Of iniet tht col~ be
, substatially affecled by th outc of th proing.
20. Such other imtters as may facilitate the just spdy and inexpensve dispsition of Ibis
. matter.
. -2-
Exhbit "1"
Page 64
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
03~0/200V
Page 63 of 74
41 ~1331
UNITEV STATES DISTRCT COURT
NO~l1RN DISTRCT OF CALIFORNIA
2
3
4
5
NOTICE OF A V AILABILITY OF MAGISl TE JlDGE
TO EXERCISE JURISDICTION
6
Title 28, U.S,c., § 636(c).you are hereby notified
7 'In accordance with the provisions of
8 that a Uniied States magistrate j~dge 0.£ this district is available to exercise the court'8 jurisdiction
9 and to conduct any or all proceedings in this case including a jury or nonjUl)' trial. an~ entry of a
i O. fial judgment. Exercise of this jurisdiction by a magistrate judge is. however,
permitted onl if
11 al,l paries voluntarJy consent.
12 You may; ,without advefse substantive consequences, withhold your consent, but this will
i 3 pÌevent the court's jurisdiction from being exercised by a magistrate judge.
14 0 Ai appe from a judgment entered by a magistrate judge may be taken directly to the
15 0 United -States court of appeas for this judicial circuit in the same manner as an åpJleaJ from My
1.6. ,other jùdgien of a district court,
i 7- Côpies of the Form for the "Consent to Exercise of Jurisdction by a Uni States
18: 'MllgiSttitè Judge" are avaiable from the clerk of court.
oJ
,19', , The pJaintiff or removing pary shal serve a copy oftbis notice upon aU other paesto
o' . . '.
2(1; ,this ae-iòn, PUrsuant to Fedet:arRule!o££j:J.Pioe~ure 4 and 5.
....
21
't.; ;;'~ .;
,FOR 11 COURT
22
23
24
RlCHA W, WIEKIG, CLER
~~~ ~~
By: Depuiy . Jerk .
25'
-t
26 . magcons.nlc (rev, 10/99)
27
28
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 65
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 64 of 74
41 ~1331
FIRST LEGAL
03120120011
AO :J 1121
NonCE OF lAWSUIT AND REQUEST FOR
WAIVE.R OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS
TO: (A)
as (6)
.of (C)
A lawsùlt ha ben commenced against you (or the entiy on whose behalf yo are addresse;)
it ha ben fied In the United States Distôct Cort
for the (0) District of
A copy of t.he complaint Is attache to this notice.
and has ben asslgne(j docket number (E)
This Is not a formal summos
or notiièation from the court, but rather my request that you sign
and return the enclosed waver of sel~ in order to. sae the cost
and an additioal copy
of serving you
,with' a judicial summons
of the complaint The cot of service wil be avoid~ If I reive a signed copy of
the waiver within (F. da~ after the date designated below as the date on which this Notice
and Request Is sent. I enè,lose a stampe and addre envelope (or othe means of cost-free return)
for'your use. An extra copy,of the waer Is aloaltaced for your records.
If you comply with this .requ~t an return the signe waiver, it wil be fled with the court and no
summons wil be served on you. The action wil then pro as If you ~ ben served on the date the
waiv~r is filed, except that you wilt not ~ obirgated to arswerthe complalnt 'before GO day~ from the date
desIgnated below as the date on which-thIs notice Is sent (or before 90 days from that dae If your address
,is not in any judicial distrit of th United States.)
If you do not retum the,slgned waiver within the time Indicatei.1 WILL take approprate steps to
effect fonnal service In a,man,er authozed by
'the Fedral ,Rules of .civl Procedure an wil then. to the
extent aUthorized' by those ,Rules, -ask the 'Clt' to require' you (or the pay on whse behaf you are
,addms,lQ.:paY4he:'~U;ëøl&ofò'lJ..slN:htlJn-~pJe-ihesktemwoo~mlng.f:' . .~"
tti duly 0" paries tò ,walvR:th& seNiee.oÜrr'suìins; whlch-rs, Set forth at thefQQt of the
i affinn that this rèquest Is being sË:mt 10 you on behalf of the plaintif, this
,waiver fonn.
day of
Signture ofPlaiotif's' Attory
or Unrepresented Plaintiff
A - ~ 01 IndiYlal defendant (or na of,olllcr or avl of c;allt defenanl)
Ð - nile, OJ oth relatiop ol'lilYua' to corPate defendant
C ,- Na of eopote. defenan lt an ,
o ,- OIrlt
E - Ookel numbe at actio
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 66
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 65 of 74
41 "1331
FIRST LEGAL
03/201200°
100,), ll9.Jt
WAIVER OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS
TO:
4NAME'OF PLINTIFF'S ATTORNE' Of UlPfESENTEO PLAINTIfF)
I acknowledge receipt of your reqUest that I waive seivce of a summor:s in the action of
, which is cae number
tCPTIO Of ACTIO)
in the United States District Caurt for the
IOEl NIJR1
, District of
: i have also received a copy of the complaint In the
action, two
copies of thlsinstrument, an'a mean'S 'by whieh'I'C8n return thesigneú.waiver'toyou wltttut
cost 10 me.
I agree to sae the cost of service of a summons and an additQnal copy of the coplaint In this
lawsuit by nqt reQllñng that i (or ,the entity on whose behalf i am acting) be served with Judicial process
in the manner provide by Rule 4.
I (or the entiy on whose behalf I am acting) wil retain afl defenses or objections to the lawsuit
or to' the jurisdiction or venue of the court except ,for objections bas on a defect in the summons or '
in the service of the summons. '
on whose behalf i am.acting)
I understand that a judgment may be entered against me (or the pary
if an answer or motion under Rule 12 is not'served upon you- within 6Q days after .
. . ¡(TE REOUT WAS sail
or within 90 days 'after that date if the requet was sent outside the United States.
DAlE
, SIGNATURE
Printedyped Nam:
of
As
(TITLE)
(CORPORATE OEfENOAIl
Duty to ,"voi Unneesry Costs of See 01 Sus
, Rule" of lti Froral Rules of CIVI Procedure reqlls cen paies io cooe 1(1 sang unnessry costs 01 serve of the summos
aM coml"ainl. A delenanlloated In the Untec Siate: whO. alter beng noille of an -itlo an ased by a l"aintiflloced In the Ured Sla!eS
10 waive service 01 a summos, lails 10 do so wi be requred 10 ~ the cost 01 such seice unless go cause be shon lor ¡is faôlure to sign
and rellJß lhe waô...
II is no goo cause lor a faile to wai serv Ihat a pay beieves illllhe coplait is unound. or lhallhe aciio ha be brout
'in an improp pl or In a co that
laks juiciOf ove the su mattes oHhe acio Of 0Y its person or propey. fi p~y who waies ~lce
01 lll sumrn ,el;n al iltehse,¡i obio If:ce an realin 10 lhe sis or to lhe servC' ollhe :Sfl); an ma !ales obie1
, 10 til jurllio of llI cou 'or 10 it pi wt !h actio ha be br. ' .
A defend wl waW $C(çe.mul wihin th tlspie On th wai~fonn see on lhe plnlll's allorn (or unr~ed,plntlll,
a resse,to th'coalnt an mua1so Iie,a SI;CIol the resWith the,Cl." lhe an or,molio 1$,li1 sii wlltlihl'li ,
a êlaul illgme ma be taken agtll deen 8y waYi see, a defent Is allowe ffe iim 10 answer lhan,lI.lhe sur ha
ben aclualy seiV when the requet lOf waier of see was rec. '
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 67
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
03/2012009
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
Page 66 of 74
41' '-;1331
~,,; ~,;:~
~J8'~.
..c.--"'~""d
.....:
.:;i~.;.
~t)j-~..i~,.
~ V'
~:'il~. of
" . .' . .. .
.,,;;e~,/~.';~~!,:'~,,::
'~d;'.fJF,.~."tf~l~ìl"infM.r'~iø"M..lö~t, ,.
,i!re
. ':Î: '~ you
", .)0.
.. ,~.
'. . .
, ~'"
'81' ';',
partrtip.tlj\gJn;hàs beeri d~~lgOat~for thIs CQ.uitis '
.::: ','d.nlt,Ca$e Atll1g,(6Ç
Pltãln, p-tir$a'nt:tb'Cì'íIi,i.ØtI'Ri)lè 5"'4an(j' '.
-- :,~iGi-er 45~ 1lSrle,ans t6à('¡9~._it~t(dieCkoffthe ooxes Sf Wl1e,n
~ii'ê): ' ,.,'.,. .
, '
. 'ÈI,t, S,èNè:t EcFR'e.lstratlonlnformatlpn Ha!idot '9" ân p¡utitS.tb, '
tlleqi'~ along wJt,liJhê; '~m~.liitr or ,for't~~oval!;,. the refnoYaltiotl~; ..
ÐO,NOT serv the.øni~r äppllqJtlori form,jlJsttl/s handOU.
Eàct'~ttomeyrel?re~naAa ~ 'Ra.tt OOv.s.f,lso: ,
O~),:R~l~r' ~O;~qOnie:,a?,~tUerb'(6~fIn#ø.tlt~Qe:~~ ap'J)Utatip~ '
fQrm; .t!o1lø~A:IL,tA~'fistritt!t)n.s',Q!ltt:~'Jør.ro që)r~1illy.lf 'yóu,~re
.:l
, ,al~ad¥..regls~r~:ln,:t6.s:dlst'Çil --acii.~cit;tt9f~~#¡'iiøa~1 yoor
, r,ëglsttiol' Is vålitHqhllfeon àli'eêFèases'ffttlls dlStrtct.
.....',..
',:ß'
'¡'-
.'\,,"
..., ~,,;;
":. .
. ." ..
."
"
,,' ',ECF"" ".,r.atipn f0'rros~;if\-e¡-actrvetutijriåi~'.,and CQ,ml:llat~li!~titi,
. ,"
, ;., ': ;.:.,f:llfl , ,:;y;~ë:.;fòûn~:~ó'th~ ~tF;,~e~fté:d'-':'d:';'i':;d.~:¡"::"~ "'..~:n,
. ,',
",",
",'"
- .-: ¡', ~ ~:.
.. '" ., '. ~':
,j~~ .lölà.~.,
'V:,t~~~i~tÏ'4.tl1 ~
.:~. .'
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 68
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/20/200Y
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
4'- .
Page 67 of 74
l-133
\
ts orI9¡na,!y:,supmlt~tp, th:ê.çOÜtt '.
'ete.) 'm9#t~~~~11,~ta~f '_
" I"$i~ri tri~ thll'J;ëfét.ì\g, '
ne&¡s;~a,š"(jf the opehln!i cOf'yóur'
.' e$,:p,L' go.
.', ion (J~"f"', :~;, .
,to':
. ',,,~~a'$lnlti~l~ .Intn,è,~~~~;4l~'~:;af all
,.è?,fl~ed to walt 'fQr yoLlr -regl$tta'tön tp
,~;~:~:-~~t~\~~~~~:i=~i';Qn.
, ,. " veT g~~eti S~i:.rn~l-s/. :or;~riy ,
"'. ':.;:.:;. :~ " . .
" . ~t 't"l..'ot~.....';';A""" :';,l' ~ :A'
,ling; flu e ,1:ìÇl ':i'i"!;,;ao"ne~ ;~v ,el'Ue
.- ~J:" ,",:'" ...... .~..
¡.:
...: .:.~:.:'\i..~:. ....;.
.. . * ~...' .
~", :
, ..
'.::..:~.:::' .
":;':~'l;'. .;.....::.,
_. '.-'.l.
i . ~,
~:"
, ~: ';.,J)Ç~~Y\: ',V,;"
" .,:"':', . ...;.- ~ .
", ..' . .~.:, ..
:" '¡.:..'"
.,'. .....'
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 69
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
03120/200~
Page 68 of 74
41' ~1331
,,
-. '-i~'"
.'~; !\
.-; .
,.;
"'''..
....:'.
. l. :~: .'
:.,.....:...
:1.'
. ~..
",ï
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 70
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
03/2012009
41 ''lI331Page 69 of 74
DocumentFIRST
WELCOME TO THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT, SAN FRANCISCO
OFFICE HOURS: 9:00 A.M. TO 4:00 P.M.
415.522.2000
www.cand.uscourts.gov
In Addition to the Local Rules, the Following Guidelines Have Been Provided to Ensure That
the Filng Process Is Accomplished with Ease and Accuracy. For Additional Information or
Assistance, Please Call the above Number During Offce Hours.
1.
the chambers of
the judge to whom the action has been assigned. We do not accept filings for
cases assigned to judges or magistrate judges in the Oakland or San Jose division,
per Civil L.R. 3-2(b).
4.
This offce wil retain the original plus one copy of most documents submitted.
We wil confonn as many copies as you bring for your use. Related cases require
an extra copy for each related action designated.
3.
The copy retained goes directly to the assigned Judge. Couresy copies, or
Documents are to be fied in the Clerk's Offce at the location of
instructions for couriers to deliver a copy directly to chambers are inappropriate,
unless you have been instrcted to do so by court order.
4.
In order to faciltate the fie stamping process, each onginal document should be
submitted on top of its copies. In other words, group like documents together-.as
opposed to a set of originals and separate sets of copies.
5.
The case number must indicate whether it is a civil or criminal matter by the
inclusion of e or CR at the beginning of
the number. Miscellaneous and foreign
judgment matters should also be indicated with initials MISe or FJ at the end of
the case number.
6.
The case number must include the initials of the judge and/or magistrte judge
followed by the letters designating the case Arbitrtion (ARB), Early Neutrl
Evaluation (ENE) or Mediation (MD)--if assigned to one of
7.
those programs.
The document caption should inclune the appropriate judge or magistrate judge
involved iii a paricular matter or before whom an appearce is being made. This
is especially importnt when submitting Settement Conference Statements.
8.
Documents are to be stapled or acco.fastened at the top. Backings, bindings and
the original document
covers are not required. Two holes punched at the top of
wil faciliate processing.
9.
Appropriately sized, stamped, self-addressed return envelopes are to be included
with proposed orders or when fiing documents by maiL.
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 71
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
03/20/2001'
Filed 03/31/2008
Page 70 of 74
41 ')1331
fIRST LEGAL
i O. Proofs of service should be attached to the back of documents. If submitted
the document showing
separately, you must attach a pleading page to the front of
case number and case caption.
i 1. There are no filing fees once S. case has been opened.
12. New cases must be accmpanied by a completed and signed Civil Cover Sheet, the
filing fee or fee waiver request form and an original plus two copies of the
complaint and any other documents. For Intellectual Propert caes, please
provide an onginal plus three copies of the com,plaint. Please present new caes
amount of
for filing before 3:30 p.m., as they tae a considerable
time to process.
13. Copies of forms may be obtained at no charge. They may be picked up in person
from the Clerk's Offce forms cabinet or with a wrtten reuest accompanied by an
appropriate sized, stamped, self-addressed envelope for retu. In addition, copies
of
the Local Rules may be obtained, free of
charge, in the Clerk's Offce or by
sending a wrtten request, along with a self-addressed, 10" x 14" return envelope,
stamped with $ 3.95 postage to: Clerk, U.S. District Court, 450 Golden Gate
Avenue, 16th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94102.
14. Two computer-terminals which allow public acess to case dockets and one
terminal with information regarding fies at the Federal Records Center (FRC) are
the Clerk's Offce. Wntten instrctions are posted
located in the reception area of
the Clerk's Offce, electronic access to docets is
available thugh PACER. To obtai information or to register call 1 ~800-6766851.
by the terminals. Outside of
i 5. A fie viewing room is located adjacent to the reception area. Files may be viewed
in this area afer signing the log sheet and presenting identification. Files are to be
returned by 1:00 pm Under no circumstaces are fies to be removed from the
viewing room.
16. The Clerk's Offce ca only accept payment by exact change or check made
payable to Clerk, U.S. Distrct Court. No change ca be made for fees or
'the
public copy machine.
17. Two pay copy machines are located in the fie viewing room for public use, at
fifteen cents ($.15) per page. Copy cards may be purchases atthe snack bar on the
first floor. Orders for copywork may be place through Eddie's Document
Retrieval by phoning 415-317-5556. Arangements may be made to bring in a
personal copier by callng the Clerk's Offce in advance.
18. We have a drop box for filing when the Clerk's Offce is closed. Pleae see
attached for availabilty and instnctions.
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 72
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
03/20(200'
Page 71 of 74
41 ''j1331
SAN FRACISCO
Article III Jud2es
Jud2es Initials
Alsup, Wiliam H.
WHA
Chen, Edwar M.
EMC
Breyer, Charles R.
'CRB
James, Mara-Elena
ME
Chesney, Maxine M.
MMC
Laporte, Elizabeth D.
EDL
Conti, Samuel
SC
Laron, ~ames
JL
Hamilton, Phylls 1.
PJH
Spero, Joseph C.
JCS
Henderson, TheIton E.
1EH
Zimmennan, Bernard
BZ
Ilston, Susan
SI
Jenkins, Marin J.
MJJ
Patel, ~arilyn Hall
MHP
Schwarer, Wiliam W
WWS
Walker, VaugJi R
VRW
White, Jeffey S.
JSW
Matdtrate JUd2e8
Jud2es Initals
SAN JOSE
Artcle in Judges
Fogel, Jeremy
Ware,
James
Whyte, Ron~d M.
Jud2es Initials
Magitrate Judges
JUd2es Initials
JF
Lloyd, Howard R.
HR
JW
Seeborg, Richard
RS
RMW
Trubull, Patrcia V.
PVT
OAKAN
Artcle III Judges
Jud2es Initials
Armstrong, Saundra B.
SBA
Jensen, D. Lowell
DLJ
Wilken, Claudia
CW
Magitrte Judges
Brazil, Wayne D.
Judges Initials
WDB
Exhbit "1"
Page 73
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
03/20/200P
S&n Francisco
16th Floor
San Jose
2nd Floor
Oakland
1st Floor
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
41
building closed between
6PM and 6AM
5PM and 7:30AM
5:00 PM and 7:00 AM
Page 72 of 74
'1)1331
more info 415-522-2000
more info 408-535-5364
more info 510-637-3530
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN
DROP BOX FILING PROCEDURS
1. The drop box, located outside the Clerk's Offce (see above char), is available for the
fiiing of documents before 9:00 a.m. and after 4:00 p.m. weekdays. Pleae note that acess to the
federa building is limited to 'nonnal business hours' (as noted in th char above).
2. The drop box: may not be used for the fiing of any briefs in support of, or in opposition
to, any matter scheduled for a hearing within 7 calendar days. All such documents must be filed
in the Clerk's Offce during regular offce hour by the date due.
3. Using the electronic fie staping machine located next to the drop box, stap each
original document "Received" on the'back side ofthe last page. Clerk's Offce employees
empty the box once each cour day when the Clerk's Offce opens to the public. The "Filed"
date, which wil be place on original documents by Intae personnel, wil be the same as the
"Received" date, unless the "Received" date is a weekend or Cour holiday. In those instances,
the "Filed" date will be the first cour day following the weekend or holiday. Documents placed
the day the box is next emptied.
in the drop box without a "Received" stap will be filed as of
4. After stamping each original and enclosing one copy for the cour * the docwnents must
be placed in an orange cour mailing pouch or red Expando folder provided for your
convenience. To faciltate processing of your documents, each original document should be
submitted on top of its copies. Prior to placing the pouch or folder in the drop box, please inert
in the pouch or folder widow a fully completed Drop Box Filig Information Card. You
may use more than one pouch or folder per filing, but a separate Information Card must be
enclosed for each one.
(*Pleae note that the Clerk's Offce wil retain two copies of
all new complaits relating to
patents, trademarks and copyrghts.)
you wish us to mail you one or more confonned copies that you have provided, you
5. If
must enclose an appropriately sized, self-addressed, staped envelope with adequate retur
you would like to pick up conformed copies, please mark your return
postage. Alternatively, if
envelope "FOR MESSENGER PICK UP,BY: (NAME. FIRM." Your copies will be
'available for pick-up after 2:00 p;m. on the day the drop box is emptied.
required, may be paid by check or money order, payable to "Clerk, U.S.
District Court" in an exact amount. Please do not enclose cash.
6. A filing fee, if
7. Documents deposited in the drop box must be in compliance with all
local and federal
rules, as appropriate. Documents fied "Under Seal" must be submitted in compliance with Civil
L.R. 79-5.
Exhbit "1"
Page 74
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
03120120r
Page 73 of 74
~ - i61331
PROOF OF SERVICE
CCP 1013a(3)/FRCP 5
2
I am a resident of, or employed in, the County of Los Angeles. I am over the age of 18 and not a
3
4
5
par to this action. My busines address is: Steptoe & Johnson LLP, 2121 Avenue ofthe Stars,
Suite 2800, Los Angeles, California 90067.
On March 20, 2008, I served the following listed document(s), by method indicated below, on the
paries in this action: DEFENDANrS NOTICE OF FILING NOTICE OF REMOVAL
6
7
SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST
o BY U.s. MAI
o BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE
(via electronic fig service provider)
By placing 0 the onginall 0 a tre copy th~f enclose in a
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
sealed envelops), with postge fully preaid, addred as pe the
attached sece list for collection and mailng at Steptoe &
Johnson LLP, 2121 Avenue of
the Sta, Suite
90, Los Angeles
California 90067., following ordinar busines price. i am
By elecnically trsmittin, the document(s)
listed above to LexisNexis File and See, an
eleconic filing seice prvider at
ww.fileandsere.lexisneiÜs.co, fr the email
reily fìmilar with Steptoe & Johnson LLP's practce for
addr tísteptoe.co, at
collecion and prong of doents for mailing. Under that
approximately _' To my knowledge, the
practice the docment is depite with the United States Postl
Serce on the sae day as it is collected and processe for mailng
trsmission was rerted as complete and
in the ordinar corse of business.
2060.
o BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY
By deliverng the doment(s) list above in a seed envelops)
o BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE
(to Indivdual pers.s)
or package(s) designated by the expr sece caer, wi
By electrnically trsmittg th document(s)
deliver fee paid or prvided for, addreed as pe the attached
listed above to the eiil addrees) of
sece list to a facility relary maintained by the exre serce
caer or to an authorze corier or driver authorze by th
pen(s) set fort on the atched serce list
without err. Se Cal, R. Ct. R. 2053, 2055,
the
frm the email addret/epoecom
at approximately _' To my knowledge, the
expr seiice carrer to reive documents.
trsmission wa reprted as complete and
17
18
19
without err. See CaL. R. Ct R. 206.
¥ BY PERSONAL SERVICE
o BY FACSIME
, 0 By penaly deiverng and handing the dot(s) listed
By tranttng the document(s) liste above from
above to the pen( s) identified on the attched sece list.
Steptoe & Johnson LLP in Lo Angeles,
Calforia to the facsimile machine telephone
20
:~y penally deliverng the doument(s) listed above to the
numbe s) se for on the atched seice list.
offce øddres) as shown 00 the attched sece list and leavig
Serce by facsimile trnsmission was mad 0
21
is in chare leaving it in a consicuous place in the offce(s).
said docment(s) with a cler or other
22
23
24
25
pe in che, or irno one
put to agrment oftlie paries, confimied in
wrting, or 0 as a courtesy to the paries,
o By peonally deliverng the document(s) listed above to the
addres(es) as shown on the attched seice list and leaving said
documt(s) with someone of suitable age and discrion reding at
said addresees),
I declare under penaty of peijur under the laws of the State of Californa and the United States of
America that the above is true and corr.
26
/' Executed on March 20. 2008 at Los Angeles, CalfomiY--' , , /. ,1~'
27
28
l~~ Jt4.,'14;.- ¡.L (.:. l..¿, '-~' i . \l, '- C... \,C' -n -l. t/ i.,,..l'
Type or Prit Name Signatue
3
PROOF OF SERVICE
552036
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 75
Case 3:08-cv-01520-SC
Document 6-2
03/20/20r
Filed 03/31/2008
FIRST LEGAL
Page 74 of 74
J -26133 I
SERVICE LIST
Lisa KniCht. et al. v. Red Door Salons. Inc.. et al.
San Francisco County Superior Court
2
3
COUNSEL FOR PLAIN
4
5
6
7
Michael von Loewenfe1dt
Michael NO
KERR & W AGSTAFFE, LLP
100 Spe Stre, Suite 1800
San Fracisc, CA 94105-1528
8
Gar E. Moss
9
10
11
Mar Patrcia Hough
Derk M. Thomas
LAW OFFICES OF MOSS & HOUGH
601 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 2030
San Fracisc, CA 94102
12
13
14
15
16
17
is
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
PROOF OF SERVICE
552036
Exhbit" 1 "
Page 76

11 Plaintiffs - FindForms.com

Transcription

Similar documents

Other Recent Decisions - International Foundation of Employee

Droste v. Vert Capital Corp.

Gidewon et al Order on Defedants` Motion for Summary Judgment

BC3B 1 654

Petitioners` Motion for Equitable Relief Striking or

Judgment Approving Class Action Settlement

Complaint-Christian Louboutin v. Yang, et al. (S.D.N.Y.

to read entire motion - Thomas More Law Center

dismissed a putative class action

Q:\MDL 2179\Special Master\MDL 2179 Order re Appoint Louis

Fareportal v. LBF Travel - Santa Clara Law Digital Commons

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW

Consumer Fraud Complaint - Sacramento County District Attorney

The Class Action Chronicle | Fall 2014

Log into your (student`s) FAFSA at www.fafsa.ed.gov

croscill david kahn

See the EXCLUSIVE Court Docs.

Surocco v. Geary, 3 Cal. 69, 1853 WL 639, 58 Am.Dec. 385

1 To be Argued by or To be Submitted by

Exhibit E - El Nuevo Herald

No Good Deed Goes Unpunished - UC Hastings Scholarship