Judge: Stephen P. Pfahler, Case: 24STCV03626, Date: 2025-01-07 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV03626    Hearing Date: January 7, 2025    Dept: 68

Dept. 68

Date: 1-7-25

Case #24STCV03626

Trial Date: Not Set

ARBITRATION

MOVING PARTY: Defendants, Real Time Staffing Services, LLC, et al.

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff, Emilia Sanchez

RELIEF REQUESTED

Motion to Compel Arbitration

SUMMARY OF ACTION

Plaintiff Emilia Sanchez was employed from June 18, 2021 through February 10, 2022. Plaintiff alleges wrongful termination following an on the job injury thereby interfering with work as a fork lift operator on November 18, 2021.

On February 13, 2024, Plaintiff filed a complaint for 1. Discrimination In Violation Of Gov’t Code §§12940 Et Sep.: 2. Retaliation In Violation Of Gov’t Code §§12940 Et Sep.: 3. Failure To Prevent Discrimination And Retaliation In Violation Of Gov’t Code §12940(K); 4. Failure To Provide Reasonable Accommodations In Violation Of Gov’t Code §§12940 Et Seq.; 5. Failure To Engage In A Good Faith Interactive Process In Violation Of Gov’t Code §§12940 Et Seq.; 6. For Declaratory Judgment; And 7. Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy. Defendants answered the complaint on March 21, and April 5, 2024. On August 14, 2024, Plaintiff dismissed Prologistix.

RULING: Granted.

Defendants Real Time Staffing Services, LLC d/b/a Select Staffing, Employbridge Holding Company, and Employbridge, LLC, move to compel arbitration on the complaint filed by Plaintiff Emilia Sanchez. Defendant Syncreon Technology (USA) LLC filed a joinder and additional points and authorities in support. Defendants maintain Plaintiff executed the agreement, all claims are subject to arbitration under the terms of the agreement, and the agreement in no way presents unconscionable terms. Defendants Real Time Staffing Services, LLC, et al. submitted a notice of non-opposition.

The law creates a general presumption in favor of arbitration. In a motion to compel arbitration, the moving party must prove by a preponderance of evidence the existence of the arbitration agreement and that the dispute is covered by the agreement. The burden then shifts to the resisting party to prove by a preponderance of evidence a ground for denial (e.g., fraud, unconscionability, etc.). (Rosenthal v. Great Western Fin'l Securities Corp. (1996) 14 Cal.4th 394, 413-414; Hotels Nevada v. L.A. Pacific Ctr., Inc. (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 754, 758.) Any challenges to the formation of the arbitration agreement should be considered before any order sending the parties to arbitration. The trier of fact weighs all evidence, including affidavits, declarations, documents, and, if applicable, oral testimony to determine whether the action goes to arbitration. (Hotels Nevada v. L.A. Pacific Ctr., Inc., supra, 144 Cal.App.4th at p. 758.)

Defendants represent that Employbridge Holding Company is the holding company for Employbridge, LLC, with Employbridge LLC operating as the parent company of Real Time Staffing Services, LLC. Plaintiff was assigned to work at Syncreon Technology (USA) LLC. [Declaration of Jessica Sanchez.] According to counsel for Real Time Staffing, LLC, et al., Plaintiff agrees to submit to binding arbitration if all parties, including Syncreon Technology (USA) LLC execute the stipulation. At the time of filing of the motion, Syncreon Technology (USA) LLC was not willing to stipulate. [Declaration of Michael Kun.] In the later filed joinder, Syncreon Technology (USA) LLC, now indicates its willingness to join the stipulation. [Declaration of Eric Giting.]

With the lack of any opposition and representation of a willingness from ALL parties to stipulate, rather than wait for a submitted stipulation to the court, the court GRANTS the motion to compel arbitration of all parties. The participating parties are to select an individual arbitrator pursuant to the terms of the agreement.

“If a court of competent jurisdiction, whether in this State or not, has ordered arbitration of a controversy which is an issue involved in an action or proceeding pending before a court of this State, the court in which such action or proceeding is pending shall, upon motion of a party to such action or proceeding, stay the action or proceeding until an arbitration is had in accordance with the order to arbitrate or until such earlier time as the court specifies.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.4.) The action is stayed.

The court vacates the July 3 and July 14, 2025, final status conference and trial date. The court will set an OSC re: Status of Arbitration and Stay at the time of the hearing.

Moving Defendants to provide notice to all parties.