Judge: Elaine Lu, Case: 24STCV31878, Date: 2025-05-02 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24STCV31878 Hearing Date: May 2, 2025 Dept: 9
The Court hereby
distributes a tentative ruling for the Case Management Order. The parties are welcome to provide input and
propose modification(s) to any aspect of the CMO at the Initial Status
Conference. If all parties submit on the
tentative CMO prior to the commencement of the May 2, 2025 ISC, the Court will
adopt the tentative CMO, and the parties need not appear. However, if there is any matter not addressed
in the CMO that any party would like to discuss, that party should not submit
on this tentative but instead appear at the ISC to raise the issue.
SUPERIOR
COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR
THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
Miami
Ongsiazon vs EZ Staffing, Inc.
24STCV31878
[TENTATIVE]
CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER
This action has been designated as
complex pursuant to CRC 3.400(a), and thus requires exceptional judicial
management. All provisions of this CMO are deemed necessary to carry out the
purposes of Rule 3.400(a), and to promote effective decision-making by the
Court. They are based upon individual consideration of this complex action, including
the Status Conference Reports previously filed by the parties.
1.
The
March 10, 2025 Order granting the parties’ Stipulation to continue the Initial
Status Conference required the parties to file an updated Joint Status
Conference Statement by April 25, 2025.
The parties have failed to file an updated Joint Status Conference
Statement. Therefore, the Court will
rely on the Joint Status Conference Statement filed on March 7, 2025.
2.
Defendant
states that Plaintiff signed an arbitration agreement, and as of the March 7,
2025 filing of the Joint Status Conference Statement, Defendants were in the
process of evaluating whether the arbitration agreement covers Plaintiff’s
claims.
3.
The
Parties indicate that they are both amenable to mediation. The parties are ordered to meet and confer
and to file a Joint Status Report Re: Mediation Efforts, including whether the
Parties have agreed to mediate, the identity of any mediator they may have
selected, and the date of any mediation they may have scheduled, by no later
than June 3, 2025. A Non-Appearance
Case Review Re Mediation Efforts is set for June 10, 2025 at 8:30 AM,
Department 9. If the parties agree
to a voluntary, informal exchange of discovery prior to mediating, the Court
encourages (but does not require or order) the parties to include a
verification with each production of discovery so that if the mediation is
unsuccessful, the parties will not have to duplicate or repeat this exchange of
discovery.
4.
The
Court hereby lifts the stay to permit Defendant to file and serve a Motion to
Compel Arbitration. If Defendant wishes
to file a Motion to Compel Arbitration, Defendant should do so by no later than
June 3, 2025. Before filing any motion,
the moving party must contact the Court Staff in Department 9 to obtain
a hearing date and a briefing schedule.
The Court sets a Non-Appearance Case Review Re: Filing and Serving of
Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration for June 10, 2025, 8:30 AM, Department
9.
5.
Phased Discovery. Discovery shall be phased. Upon the filing of any motion to compel
arbitration, the stay shall be lifted, and the parties will be permitted to
conduct discovery on the arbitration issue only. If Defendant does not file a motion to compel
arbitration by June 3, 2025, then effective June 3, 2025 the Court will
permit class certification discovery.
Informal discovery is permitted.
Merits-based discovery will be allowed after a successful class
certification motion. If there is a dispute concerning whether a given discovery
request is arbitration based, or certification or merits-based, the parties are
to set up a telephonic conference with the court pursuant to the instructions
herein. If the parties schedule a mediation to
occur before December 31, 2025 and if the parties wish to stay discovery
pending completion of the mediation, the parties may file a stipulation and
proposed order extending the stay on formal discovery until completion of
mediation, and the Court will likely approve such stipulation.
6.
Class list discovery.
The decision in In Re Insurance Installment Fee cases (2012) 211
Cal.App.4th 1395, 1426-1429, held that the notice procedure prescribed by the
trial court and followed by the defendant was necessary to protect privacy
rights under the California Constitution.
Therefore, upon the Court’s lifting of the stay on class certification
discovery, the parties shall use the procedure described in Belaire-West
Landscape v Superior Court (2008) 149 Cal.App.4th 554 to notify putative
class members, as described in the applicable paragraph of the currently
operative complaint, giving them the opportunity to opt out. The Joint Status Conference Statement filed
on March 7, 2025 indicates that “Plaintiff will pay for such notice, and the
parties can meet and confer regarding a third party administrator.”
a. Plaintiff
is to take the lead and prepare a proposed letter to be sent out by the
agreed-upon third party administrator.
The parties must discuss and settle upon a final version.
b. The
letter must be written using the administrator’s letterhead, not that of any
party.
c. The
defense must turn over the contact information consisting of name, address,
phone number, and email address (if available) to the third-party
administrator.
d. In the
event the putative class list is greater than 400 people, the administrator
must randomly select a sample of no more than 400. The contact information for those persons
who did not opt out must be turned over to the plaintiff.
7.
Payroll Records Discovery. Responses to any
payroll record discovery requests must be uniquely numbered and redacted so
that putative class member’s identifying information, i.e., name, social
security numbers, etc. are not revealed.
8.
Protective Order.
Parties are alerted that model protective orders may be found at Los
Angeles Superior Court website at http://www.lacourt.org/division/civil/CI0043.aspx. The parties are encouraged to use these model
orders as shown, or if modified, as a template for the modified order. A redlined courtesy copy must be posted on
the e-service bulletin board and lodged with the court at the time of filing.
The parties must use the redlined version to identify any changes proposed to
the model order.
9.
E-service & E-filing. Electronic service is not the same as
electronic filing. The parties have
agreed, and the Court has signed an order authorizing Case Anywhere as the
e-service to be used in this case.
Argument must not be posted on the bulletin board. For information on electronic filing in the
Complex Courts, please refer to https://www.lacourt.org/division/efiling/efiling2.aspx and http://www.lacourt.org/division/efiling/pdf/ComplexefilingFAQs.pdf.
10.
Class Certification Motion. Class
Certification Motion filing and serving deadline is May 4, 2026. The
plaintiff is reminded that the plaintiff’s brief must contain a trial
plan. The trial plan MUST be
filed as a separate brief. As with all
other motions, Counsel must call the Court to obtain a hearing date and
briefing schedule PRIOR to filing and serving the motion for Class
Certification. The Court sets a Non-Appearance
Case Review for May 11, 2026, 8:30 AM, Department 9.
11.
Telephonic conferences. The Court handles discovery motions
informally, using telephonic conferences and LA CourtConnect. Counsel must post
a message via their Electronic Service Provider to request any informal
discovery conference or other conference. The Court will either reply to the
message or issue a Minute Order setting the conference. The telephonic conference will automatically
be taken off calendar if all relevant parties have not scheduled the telephonic
conference with LA CourtConnect. Parties
must file and serve a 5-page joint brief two days before the conference. Since
these conferences are informal, no court reporter or audio recording is
permitted.
12.
Potential Related Cases. Counsel are ordered to file and serve a
Notice of Related Case for any potentially related cases pursuant California
Rule of court Rule 3.300, including any PAGA case involving the same
representative plaintiff. This is a
continuing obligation on both plaintiffs and defendants while this case is
pending.
13.
Settlement.
File a Notice of Settlement on Judicial Council form CM-200, a mandatory
form.
a. Consider using the form wage and hour
settlement agreements now available on the court’s website at https://www.lacourt.org/forms/all – “Civil Forms” section.
With input and unanimous consensus from an Ad Hoc Wage and Hour
Committee, the court posted: (1) a form class action settlement
agreement, (2) a form class action/PAGA settlement
agreement, (3) and a form PAGA settlement agreement. Using these
forms should cut down on attorney negotiation time and reduce the lag time
between a successful mediation and execution of a long form agreement. Filing a motion that is based on a form
agreement and includes a redlined copy identifying modifications will also
expedite the court’s review process and help reduce the current backlog on
hearings.
b. If settlement includes dismissal of
class action claims (such as a PAGA only settlement or an individual settlement), then Plaintiff
must comply with CRC 3.769 and 3.770 in order to obtain dismissal of class
claims. Do NOT use Judicial
Council Form Civ-110, Request for Dismissal.
Plaintiff
is ordered to download (1) the instant signed order from the Court’s
website, (2) the minute order for today, and (3) the signed order authorizing
electronic service provider, to give formal notice of each of these to all
other parties, and to file proof of service of such within five (5) days.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: May 2, 2025
__________________________
ELAINE
LU
Judge
of the Superior Court