Judge: Stephen P. Pfahler, Case: 21STCV20205, Date: 2025-02-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV20205    Hearing Date: February 18, 2025    Dept: 68

Dept. 68

Date: 2-18-25

Case: 21STCV20205

Trial Date: N/A

CONFIRM ARBITRATION

MOVING PARTY: Defendants, Nobu Hospitality, LLC, et al.

RESPONDING PARTY: Unopposed/, Plaintiffs, Blanca Barrios, et al.

RELIEF REQUESTED:

Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award

SUMMARY OF ACTION

On July 29, 2021, Plaintiff Blanca Barrios, Roxana Duran, and Luz Pillado filed a complaint Against Nobu Hospitality, LLC; Nobu Corp; Jozu Hospitality LLC; Jozu, LLC; Eddie Gomez; and, Erick Merilos, for 1. Sexual Harassment- Hostile Work Environment 2. Retaliation 3. Gender Discrimination 4. Failure To Prevent Harassment and/or Retaliation 5. Wrongful Termination in Violation Of Public Policy 6. Conversion On September 8, 2021, the court granted Defendants’ motion(s) to compel arbitration and stay the action.

On November 23, 2022, Plaintiffs dismissed Nobu Corp., and Nobu Hospitality. On May 1, 2024, Barrios dismissed all defendants.

On August 20, 2024, Jozu Hospitality, Eddie Gomez, and Eric Merilos filed petitions to confirm the arbitration awards as to Plaintiffs Roxana Duran and Luz Pillado.

RULING: Granted.

Defendants Jozu, LLC;, Eddie Gomez, and, Erick Merilos move to confirm the arbitration awards as to the complaint brought by Plaintiffs Roxana Duran and Luz Pillado. Defendants filed separate, concurrent petitions and notices of motions. The court consolidates the petitions/motions into a single minute order given the single complaint filed by both Plaintiffs, and single order directing all parties arbitration, even if separate arbitration awards were awarded per Plaintiff. The court electronic filing system shows both motions/petitions remain unopposed. Moving Defendants filed separate notices of non-opposition.

On May 13, 2024, and July 18, 2024, the arbitration panels ordered Final Awards in favor of Defendants/Petitioners. [Petition, Ex. 8(c): Final Award.] Neither award includes a copy of a proof of service of the award from the arbitrators.

The court must confirm the award as made, unless it corrects or vacates the award, or dismisses the proceeding. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1286; Valsan Partners Limited Partnership v. Calcor Space Facility, Inc. (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 809, 818.) Service of the petitions and notices of the motions to confirm the awards was completed via electronic service on August 20, 2024. Plaintiffs/Respondents provided no objection to the service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1290.4, subd. (a).) Service is therefore presumed valid. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1290.4, subd. (b).) The motions/petitions contain all required items. [Petitions, Ex. 8(c).] (Code Civ. Proc., § 1285.4.) Respondent submits no challenge to the petition within the 10-day challenge period for a party participant following the August 20, 2024, filed petition, or within the 100-day window following issuance of the final award (assuming service of the awards on the issuance date).

(Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1285, 1285.2, 1288.2, 1290.6; Valencia v. Mendoza (2024) 103 Cal.App.5th 427, 444; Correia v. NB Baker Electric, Inc. (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 602, 612; Eternity Investments, Inc. v. Brown (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 739, 745.)

All arbitration awards, including those that already have been satisfied or performed, are subject to confirmation, and not moot. (Pacific Law Group: USA v. Gibson (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 577, 580.)

The unopposed petitions/motions are therefore granted.

Defendants/Petitioners to submit a single proposed judgment.

Defendants/Petitioners to provide notice.