LAURENCE W. PARADIS (Bar No. 122336) KEVIN KNESTRICK (Bar No. 229620) CHRISTINE CHUANG (Bar No. 257214) DISABILITY RIGHTS ADVOCATES 2001 Center Street, Fourth Floor Berkeley, California 94704 Telephone:5 (510) 665-8644 Facsimile:5 (510) 665-8511 TTY:5 (510) 665-8716 Email:5 general@dralegaLorg

ARLENE MAYERSON (Bar No. 79310) SHIRA WAKSCHLAG (Bar No. 273548) DISABILITY RIGHTS EDUCATION AND DEFENSE FUND, INC. 3075 Adeline Street, Sutie 210 Berkeley, California 94703 Telephone: (510) 644-2555 Fax/TTY: (510) 841-8645 amayerson@dre swakschlag@dredforg

BILL LANN LEE (Bar No. 108452) CATHA WORTHMAN (Bar No. 230399) JULIA CAMPINS (Bar No. 238023) LEWIS FEINBERG LEE RENAKER & JACKSON, P.C. 476 9th Street Oakland, California 94607 Telephone: (510) 839-6824 blee a,lewisfeinberg.com cwortbman@lewisfeinberg.com jcampins@lewisfeinberg.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING, INC., JANET BROWN, and LISA KILGORE on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
WAL-MART STORES, INC.,
Defendant.

Case No.:
COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT, 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq., THE UNRUH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, CAL. CIV. CODE § 51, et seq., and THE CALIFORNIA DISABLED PERSONS ACT, CAL. CIV. CODE §§ 54-54.3.
CLASS ACTION

INTRODUCTION 
 1. This class action lawsuit challenges ongoing discrimination by defendant WalMart Stores, Inc. ("Defendant" or "Wal-Mart") based on the company's refusal to provide accessible point of sale ("POS") terminals for consumers with mobility disabilities who use wheelchairs and scooters, at many of Wal-Mart's retail stores throughout California. POS terminals allow customers to input sensitive and private information in a secure manner such as their Personal Information Number (PIN); submit debit or credit card data by swiping a payment card; verify, authorize or cancel a transaction; submit a signature; provide the consumer with the option to select to receive cash-back from their account; select an amount of cash back to be provided; and perform other affiliated tasks which involve inputting, correcting, cancelling or entering information that is personal or affects access to personal information and finances. 2. POS terminals at multiple Wal-Mart stores are mounted at inaccessible heights so that customers who use wheelchairs or scooters have to struggle to process their payment securely or cannot see the display screens or independently use the terminals. Wal-Mart has for years known of the discriminatory impact of its inaccessible POS terminals for its customers with mobility disabilities, yet insists on continuing to use inaccessible devices in many of its stores. Reliable alternative POS terminal are readily available that would provide secure, independent and equal access. 3. Because many customers who use wheelchairs and scooters cannot easily view, reach and use Wal-Mart's POS terminals securely and independently, they must often process their transactions without knowing the information displayed on the POS viewscreen. Often, customers in wheelchairs and scooters must stretch and strain upwards just to try to see enough of the viewscreen to process the transaction using their credit or debit card. In multiple instances disabled customers have been forced to divulge private information such as their PIN to a cashier or other third party, ask the cashier or others to input information and select specific functions available at the POS terminals, and/or ask a cashier and/or others to sign on their behalf in order to complete transactions. These problems with the accessibility of the POS terminals are exacerbated by the fact that many of the POS terminals require extensive twisting and pinching
1 
 COMPLAINT 


of customers' wrists and arms to adjust. These circumstances make the transaction payment process at many Wal-Mart stores difficult for customers with disabilities.
4. Wal-Mart has continued to use POS terminals mounted at inaccessible heights in many of its stores despite the fact that alternative designs are readily available that make the payment process much more accessible for people with disabilities. Many of Wal-Mart's competitors utilize POS terminals mounted at lower heights and/or attached by cords that permit greater flexibility of movement and operation. A number of Wal-Mart's own stores now use POS terminals mounted at such lower heights, with equipment that allows for an easy adjustment of the angle of the viewscreen. Despite the availability and feasibility of these options, WalMart refuses to replace older equipment in many of its stores which is mounted in a manner that makes the payment process unmanageable for many wheelchair and scooter users.
5. Through the Americans with Disabilities Act, Congress provided a clear and national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities. Such discrimination includes barriers to full integration, independent living, and equal opportunity for persons with disabilities. Similarly, California law requires full and equal access to all business establishments and places where the public is invited. By refusing to make modifications to its POS equipment and check-out stands that would render its POS equipment accessible, Wal-Mart is discriminating against persons with mobility disabilities who use wheelchairs and scooters in
violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12182 et seq., California's Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code § 51 et seq. and the California Disabled Persons Act,
California Civil Code §§ 54-54.3. JURISDICTION
6. This is an action for declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and damages, brought
pursuant to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12182 et seq., California's Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code § 51 et seq. (the "Unruh Act") and
portions of the California Disabled Persons Act ("CDPA"), specifically California Civil Code §§ 54-54.3.
2 COMPLAINT

7. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343 for claims arising under the ADA.
8. This Court has jurisdiction to issue a declaratory judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202.
9. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367, this Court has jurisdiction over claims alleged herein arising under California state law.
VENUE 10. Venue is proper in the Northern District of California pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b)-(c). 11. Defendant Wal-Mart is registered to do business in California and has been doing business in California, including the Northern District of California. Wal-Mart has over 200 stores in California and numerous stores in the Northern District of California. Wal-Mart is subject to personal jurisdiction in this District. Wal-Mart has been and is committing the acts alleged herein in the Northern District of California, has been and is violating the rights of consumers in the Northern District of California, and has been and is causing injury to consumers in the Northern District of California. A substantial part of the acts and omissions giving rise to Plaintiffs' claims have occurred in the Northern District of California. 12. Members of the class reside in the Northern District of California. Named Plaintiffs Janet Brown and Lisa Kilgore reside in the District. Plaintiff Brown experienced injury in this District as a result of inaccessible POS terminals at a Wal-Mart store in Pittsburgh, California. Plaintiff Kilgore experienced injury in this District as a result of inaccessible POS terminals at the Wal-Mart store in Richmond, California. Additionally, the organizational Plaintiff Center for Independent Living ("CIL") is headquartered in Berkeley, California and serves class members within the District.
PARTIES 13. Organizational Plaintiff CIL is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization that was incorporated in California in 1971. CIL is headquartered in Berkeley, California. CIL is the first service and advocacy organization founded by and for persons with disabilities. CIL is dedicated
3 COMPLAINT

to supporting people with disabilities in their efforts to live independent lives. As part of its mission, CIL works to ensure that all aspects of human experience are accessible to people with disabilities.
14. Given its mission, CIL has legal standing to represent the interests of California residents who use wheelchairs and scooters. CIL has suffered injury due to the diversion of its time and resources caused by the barriers at issue, including but not limited to CIL's attempts to persuade Wal-Mart to address and respond to complaints regarding the inaccessibility of many of its POS machines.
15. Named Plaintiff Janet Brown is a resident of Pittsburgh, California. Ms. Brown is an individual with a disability under all applicable statutes due to her mobility disability. She is a wheelchair user who regularly shops at the Wal-Mart store located in Pittsburgh, California. Ms. Brown cannot see the display screen of the POS terminals at this Wal-Mart and cannot independently access the terminals. Ms. Brown was and currently is directly harmed by Wal­ Mart's failure to provide accessible POS terminals.
16. Named Plaintiff Lisa Kilgore is a resident of San Pablo, California. Ms. Kilgore is an individual with a disability under all applicable statutes due to her mobility disability. She has used a wheelchair for over forty years. Ms. Kilgore visits the Wal-Mart store in Richmond, California approximately five times per month. Ms. Kilgore is unable to see the display screens of the POS terminals at this Wal-Mart store and cannot independently access the terminals. Ms. Kilgore was and currently is directly harmed by Wal-Mart's failure to provide accessible POS terminals.
17. The Plaintiff class consists of all persons with disabilities who use wheelchairs and scooters as mobility aids who have been and/or are being denied equal access to POS terminals at Wal-Mart stores in California.
18. Defendant Wal-Mart is the world's largest retailer and private employer. WalMart is a public company whose stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "WMT." Wal-Mart is a Delaware corporation with stores throughout California. Wal­ Mart's corporate headquarters are located in Bentonville, Arkansas. Wal-Mart operates retail
4 
 COMPLAINT 


stores doing business as Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart Supercenters and Wal-Mart Discount Stores (hereinafter collectively "Wal-Mart stores").
19. Defendant Wal-Mart is responsible for the operations of Wal-Mart stores located throughout California including the stores located in Pittsburgh (#1615) and Richmond (#3455).
CLASS ALLEGATIONS 20. Pursuant to Rules 23(a), 23(b)(2), and 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Named Plaintiffs bring this action, for injunctive and declaratory relief, and statutory damages, on their own behalf and on behalf of all persons similarly situated. The class the Named Plaintiffs seek to represent is composed of "all persons with disabilities who use wheelchairs and scooters as mobility aids who have been or who are currently being denied equal access to point of sale terminals at Wal-Mart stores in California." 21. The persons in the class are so numerous that joinder of all such persons is impracticable and the disposition of their claims in a class action is a benefit to the parties and to the Court. 22. This case arises out of Wal-Mart's policy and practice of continuing to use inaccessible POS devices that deny persons in wheelchairs and scooters equal access to the benefits and services of its POS terminals and the benefits and services provided through its POS terminals, at multiple Wal-Mart stores. 23. The claims of the Named Plaintiffs are typical of the claims of the class as a whole because the Named Plaintiffs, or their members, are similarly affected by Defendant's failure to provide accessible POS terminals at multiple Wal-Mart stores. 24. The Named Plaintiffs are adequate class representatives because they, or their members, are directly impacted by Defendant's discrimination against them by failing to provide accessible POS terminals at Wal-Mart stores. The interests of the Named Plaintiffs are not antagonistic to, or in conflict with, the interests of the class as a whole. The attorneys representing the class are experienced in representing clients with disabilities with class action civil rights claims.
5 COMPLAINT

25. Defendant has acted and/or failed to act on grounds generally applicable to the class as a whole, thereby making appropriate final declaratory and injunctive relief with respect to the class as a whole.
26. Common questions of law and fact predominate, including questions raised by Plaintiffs' allegations that Defendant has discriminated against them by failing to provide accessible POS terminals at multiple Wal-Mart stores. A class action is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating this controversy.
27. References to Plaintiffs shall be deemed to include each named plaintiff, organizational plaintiff and each member of the class, unless otherwise indicated.
FACTS COMMON TO ALL ALLEGATIONS 28. There are over 2.7 million wheelchair users in the United States. Approximately 325,000 wheelchair users reside in California. 29. Wal-Mart has approximately 9,600 retail stores in 28 countries and consists of three different divisions: Wal-Mart Stores U.S., Sam's Club and Wal-Mart International. WalMart claims to have over 200 million customers visiting its stores each week. Through its WalMart and Sam's Club divisions, Wal-Mart operates over 4,000 stores across the United States. In California, Wal-Mart operates 76 Supercenters, 103 Discount Stores and 33 Sam's Clubs. In its last fiscal year, Wal-Mart had sales exceeding $310 billion in the United States. When its domestic and international operations are taken into account, Wal-Mart's sales totaled $419 billion. 30. Wal-Mart sells items at discount prices and prides itself on saving people money. Individuals who shop at Wal-Mart generally do so in part because Wal-Mart's prices are lower and its goods more affordable than at other retail stores. 31. At multiple stores, Wal-Mart refuses to provide accessible POS terminals for its disabled customers even though accessible designs are readily available and affordable. WalMart continues to deny patrons in wheelchairs and scooters who shop at these stores full and equal access in spite of its vast resources and its ability to provide appropriate accessible equipment.
6 COMPLAINT

32. Most POS terminals in Wal-Mart stores are located at individual check stands at the "front end" of the stores and are used for the vast majority of all customer transactions. POS terminals allow customers to input sensitive and private information such as their Personal Information Number (PIN); submit debit or credit card data by swiping a payment card; verify, authorize or cancel a transaction; submit a signature; provide the consumer with the option to select to receive cash-back from their account; select an amount of cash back to be provided; and perform other affiliated tasks such as using coupons and authorizing charitable donations, which involve inputting, correcting, cancelling or entering information that is personal or affects access to personal information or resources. The POS terminals at multiple Wal-Mart locations are mounted at inaccessible heights so that customers in wheelchairs or scooters cannot see the display screens or reach the terminals. Wal-Mart has followed a uniform policy at many of its stores of providing POS terminals at the front end of its stores that are positioned at a height and in a manner that denies full and equal access to disabled customers in wheelchairs and scooters.
33. The POS terminals at Wal-Mart stores include a type of LCD (liquid crystal display) or LED (light emitting diode) display, which provides information necessary to the transaction in a visual format (hereafter "display screen"). To process their payments securely and independently, customers generally need to be able to fully see the information displayed on the POS screen.
34. As a result of the height and positioning of POS terminals at multiple Wal-Mart locations, to successfully complete a transaction, many customers in wheelchairs and scooters are forced to struggle with inaccessible equipment during the purchase/check-out process. Often, customers with disabilities must stretch and strain just to try and see the information displayed on these screens and enter the necessary PIN or sign for a credit card transaction. Often, customers with disabilities cannot see all the information that is displayed. At times, customers with disabilities cannot enter their PIN or sign their signatures without great difficulty if at all. Conducting debit and credit card transactions requires many of these customers to request assistance from cashiers to input information and/or provide signatures on their behalf.
7 
 COMPLAINT 


35. The POS terminals at multiple Wal-Mart stores, as configured, cannot be adjusted to provide access to those in wheelchairs and scooters. Customers in wheelchairs and scooters at multiple Wal-Mart stores who attempt to adjust or move the POS terminals find great difficulty in doing so. Moving the devices often requires twisting and pinching of wrists and arms. At times, the force required to adjust the viewing angle of these devices is so great as to lead to the devices breaking apart when disabled customers try to adjust them. This is highly embarrassing for the customer with a disability.
36. Some customers with disabilities who do not wish to reveal private information to cashiers or have cashiers sign on their behalf are completely precluded from using the POS terminals at checkout stands at multiple Wal-Mart stores. These customers are required to either use cash, which they may not wish to do for a variety of reasons, or leave the store without purchasing any items.
37. At Wal-Mart stores, paper printouts are not available as an alternative method to convey the information and provide the signature functions involved in a POS transaction.
38. The above-described facts create an ongoing, systemic pattern and practice of discrimination against Wal-Mart customers who use wheelchairs or scooters. This
discrimination includes, inter alia: failing to ensure such individuals have full and equal access
to POS terminals so that they may independently and easily use credit or debit cards to conduct transactions or take advantage of other services available at POS terminal when purchasing retail goods.
39. In 2005, Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF) contacted WalMart regarding the inaccessibility of the company's POS terminals and invited Wal-Mart to participate in structured settlement negotiations to resolve DREDF's concerns. Wal-Mart declined this invitation.
40. Prior to filing this lawsuit, counsel for Plaintiffs notified Wal-Mart by certified mail of their continuing concern about the inaccessibility of the company's POS terminals at multiple Wal-Mart stores and provided detailed information regarding their allegations of
8 
 COMPLAINT 


continuing violations of federal and state nondiscrimination laws. Wal-Mart was provided with the opportunity to resolve the matter without a lawsuit but Wal-Mart declined.
EXPERIENCES OF NAMED PLAINTIFFS 41. Plaintiff Janet Brown is a resident of Pittsburgh, California who is physically disabled. Ms. Brown is a wheelchair user. Ms. Brown visits the Wal-Mart store located in Pittsburgh, California once or twice a week. Ms. Brown cannot see the display screen of the POS terminals at this store and therefore cannot see the prices of items or her total. Ms. Brown prefers to use her debit card to purchase items, but requires cashier assistance to input her confidential PIN. 42. Plaintiff Lisa Kilgore is a resident of San Pablo, California who is paraplegic. Ms. Kilgore has used a wheelchair for 44 years. Ms. Kilgore shops at the Wal-Mart store located in Richmond, Calfiornia. Ms. Kilgore prefers to shop at Wal-Mart because of Wal-Mart's low prices. Ms. Kilgore is not able to see the display screens of the POS terminals at this Wal-Mart store because they are mounted too high. Despite the fact that Ms. Kilgore would prefer to use a debit card to purchase items, she cannot privately enter her PIN into the POS terminals because the display screens are mounted too high. 43. Plaintiff Center for Independent Living ("CIL") maintains headquarters in Berkeley, California. CIL provides services, support and advocacy to enhance the rights and abilities of people with disabilities to actively participate in their communities and lead selfdetermined lives. CIL encourages people with disabilities to make their own choices and works to open doors in the community to full participation and access for all. CIL' s consumer services give people with disabilities the tools and resources they need to achieve independence. All of these services are free and feature advocacy, counseling, education and referrals. 44. CIL has had to divert its organizational resources due to Defendant's discriminatory conduct. Among other things, CIL has expended staff time and resources informing consumers with mobility disabilities of their rights and the responsibilities under the ADA and state disability laws as consumers and Wal-Mart's obligation to provide equal access
9 
 COMPLAINT 


to the benefits and services it provides to persons with disabilities. CIL has also diverted its resources through prior unsuccessful efforts to convince Wal-Mart to fix the barriers at issue.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act
(42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq.) 45. Plaintiffs incorporate, by reference herein, the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 44, inclusive. 46. Title III of the ADA entitles disabled individuals to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a). 47. Title III prohibits public accommodations from excluding an individual with a disability or a class of individuals with disabilities on the basis of a disability or disabilities of such individual or class, from participating in or benefiting from the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations of the entity or otherwise discriminating against a person on the basis of disability. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(1)(A)(i). 48. Title III prohibits public accommodations from affording an individual or class of individuals with a disability, on the basis of a disability or disabilities of such individual or class, with the opportunity to participate in or benefit from a good, service, facility, privilege, advantage, or accommodation that is not equal to that afforded other individuals. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(1)(A)(ii). 49. Title III prohibits public accommodations from providing an individual or class of individuals, on the basis of a disability or disabilities of such individual or class, with a good, service, facility, privilege, advantage, or accommodation that is different or separate from that provided to other individuals. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(1)(A)(iii). 50. Title III provides that goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations shall be afforded to an individual with a disability in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of the individual. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(l)(B).
10 COMPLAINT

51. Title III provides that an individual with a disability shall not be denied the opportunity to participate in such programs or activities that are not separate or different. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(1)(C).
52. Title III defines discrimination to include the failure of a public accommodation to make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages or accommodations to individuals with disabilities; to take such steps as may be necessary to ensure that no individual with a disability is excluded, denied services, segregated or otherwise treated differently that other individuals because of the absences of auxiliary aids and services; and to remove architectural barriers that are structural in nature, in existing facilities where such removal is readily achievable. 42 U.S.C. §12182(b)(2)(A)(ii)-(iv).
53. Title III further defines discrimination as a public accommodation's failure to design and construct facilities that are readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities (later than 30 months after July 26, 1990) and, with respect to a facility or part thereof that is altered by, on behalf of, or for the use of an establishment in a manner that affects or could affect the usability of the facility or part thereof, a failure to make alterations in such a manner that, to the maximum extent feasible the altered portions of the facility are readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities. 42 U.S.C. § 12183(a)(1)-(2).
54. Wal-Mart is a place of public accommodation. See 42 U.S.C. § 12181(7)(E).
55. The Named Plaintiffs, and the constituency the organizational plaintiff CIL serves are qualified individuals with disabilities within the meaning of the ADA.
56. Patrons of Wal-Mart stores with mobility disabilities who use wheelchairs and scooters have been denied full and equal access to Wal-Mart's goods, service, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations. Defendant has failed to take sufficient steps to remedy its discriminatory conduct. These violations are ongoing.
57. Defendant has violated Title III of the ADA by failing to make reasonable modifications to its policies, practices, or procedures to ensure that POS terminals are accessible to customers with mobility disabilities.
11 COMPLAINT

1

58. Defendant has violated Title III of the ADA by excluding Plaintiffs from its

2 services because it has not provided auxiliary aids which would render its POS terminals

3 accessible.

4

59. Defendant has violated Title III of the ADA by failing to remove barriers to its

5 POS terminals. Removal of such barriers is readily achievable.

6

60. Plaintiffs are entitled to injunctive relief. 42 U.S.C. § 12888. 


7

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for relief as set forth below. 


8

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

9

Violation of the California Unruh Civil Rights Act

(California Civil Code § 51 et seq.)

10

61. Plaintiffs incorporate, by reference herein, the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 11

44, inclusive. 12

62. Defendant operates business establishments within the jurisdiction of the state of 13

California, and as such is obligated to comply with the provisions of the California Unruh Civil 14

Rights Act, California Civil Code § 51 et seq. 15

63. The Unruh Act guarantees, inter alia, that persons with disabilities are entitled to 16

full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges or services in all business 17

establishments of every kind whatsoever within the jurisdiction of the state of California. Cal. 18

Civ. Code § 51(b). 19

20

64. The Unruh Act provides, inter alia, that a violation of the ADA, §§ 12101 et seq.,

also constitutes a violation of the Unruh Act. Cal. Civ. Code § 51(f). 21

22

65. Wal-Mart is a "business establishment" within the meaning of the Unruh Act. Cal

Civ. Code § 51(b). 23

66. Defendant generates hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue from the sale of 24

goods in California through its approximately 200 stores in California. The POS terminals at 25

Wal-Mart stores are accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, and services provided by 26

Defendant. The POS terminals at multiple Wal-Mart stores are inaccessible to patrons who use 27

wheelchairs and scooters. By providing POS terminals that are inaccessible, Wal-Mart 28

12 COMPLAINT

intentionally denies wheelchair and scooter users full and equal access to the accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, and services that Defendant makes available to the non-disabled public, in violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code §§ 51, et seq. These violations are ongoing.
67. Defendant's discriminatory conduct alleged herein includes, inter alia, the violation of the rights of persons with disabilities set forth in Title III of the ADA and therefore also violates the Unruh Act. California Civil Code § 51(f).
68. The actions of Defendant have violated and continue to violate the Unruh Act and therefore Plaintiffs are entitled to injunctive relief to remedy the discrimination.
69. Plaintiffs are also entitled to statutory minimum damages pursuant to California Civil Code § 52 for each and every offense in violation of the Unruh Act. Ca. Civ. Code § 52(b).
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for relief as set forth below. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
Violation of the California Disabled Persons Act (California Civil Code §§ 54-54.3)
70. Plaintiffs incorporate, by reference herein, the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 44, inclusive.
71. The CDPA guarantees, inter alia, that persons with disabilities are entitled to full and equal access, as other members of the general public, to accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of all "places of public accommodation" and "other places to which the general public is invited" within the jurisdiction of the state of California. Cal. Civ. Code § 54.1(a)(1).
72. Defendant offers retail goods and services to the general public at a place of public accommodation and in a place to which the general public is invited, within the jurisdiction of the state of California, and therefore is obligated to comply with the following provisions of the California Disabled Persons Act: California Civil Code §§ 54-54.3.
73. The CDPA provides, inter alia, that a violation of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq., also constitutes a violation of the CDPA. Cal. Civ. Code § 54.1(d).
13 COMPLAINT

5

California accessible to people with disabilities who use wheelchairs and scooters; 2) failing to reasonably modify Wal-Mart's policies and procedures to provide POS terminals which are accessible to people with disabilities who use wheelchairs and scooters; and 3) failing to remove readily achievable barriers at POS terminals, for Plaintiffs and similarly situated individuals with disabilities who use wheelchairs or scooters, as required by the ADA, Unruh Act and CDPA;
82. An order enjoining Defendant and its employees, agents, and any and all other persons acting on Defendant's behalf or under Defendant's control from violating the ADA and the Unruh Act;
83. A permanent injunction pursuant to the ADA and the Unruh Act requiring Defendant to institute and implement policies and procedures that ensure that individuals in wheelchairs or scooters have nondiscriminatory, full and equal independent access to POS terminals so that they may use credit or debit cards to conduct non-cash transactions when purchasing retail goods;
84. An order certifying this case as a class action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a), and 23(b)(2) and/or 23(b)(3) appointing Plaintiffs as Class Representatives, and their attorneys as Class Counsel;
85. Damages in an amount to be determined by proof, including all applicable statutory damages; Cal. Civ. Code § 52(a); Cal. Civ. Code § 54.3.
86. An order awarding Plaintiffs reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, as authorized by 42 U.S.C. § 12188, Cal. Civ. Code § 52 and Cal. Civ. Code § 54.3; and
87. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

Dated: July 25, 20125

Respectfully Submitted,
DISABILITY RIGHTS ADVOCATES
By: 5 Laurence W. Paradis Kevin M. Knestrick Christine Chuang

15 COMPLAINT

DISABILITY RIGHTS AND EDUCATION FUND, INC. Arlene Mayerson Shira Wakschlag LEWIS FEINBERG LEE RENAKER & JACKSON, P.0 Bill Lann Lee Catha Worthman Julia Campins
16 
 COMPLAINT 


 
 Case3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document13 Filed11/20/12 Page1 of 5

1 LAURENCE W. PARADIS (Bar No. 122336)

KEVIN KNESTRICK (Bar No. 229620) 2 CHRISTINE CHUANG (Bar No. 257214)

3 DISABILITY RIGHTS ADVOCATES 2001 Center Street, Fourth Floor

4 Berkeley, California 94704

Telephone: (510) 665-8644

5 Facsimile: (510) 665-8511

TTY: 6 Email:

(510) 665-8716 general@dralegal.org

ARLENE MAYERSON (Bar No. 79310) SHIRA WAKSCHLAG (Bar No. 273548) DISABILITY RIGHTS EDUCATION AND DEFENSE FUND, INC. 3075 Adeline Street, Sutie 210 Berkeley, California 94703 Telephone: (510) 644-2555 Fax/TTY: (510) 841-8645 amayerson@dredf.org swakschlag@dredf.org

7

8

BILL LANN LEE (Bar No. 108452) CATHA WORTHMAN (Bar No. 230399)

9

LEWIS FEINBERG LEE RENAKER & JACKSON, P.C. 476 9th Street

10

Oakland, California 94607 Telephone: (510) 839-6824

11

blee@lewisfeinberg.com cworthman@lewisfeinberg.com

12 jcampins@lewisfeinberg.com

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
15

16 CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING,

Case No. C 12-3885 CRB

INC., JANET BROWN, and LISA KILGORE 17 on behalf of themselves and all others

18 similarly situated,

JOINT STIPULATION AND MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF FROM

19 20 v.

Plaintiffs,

GENERAL ORDER NO. 56 TO PERMIT PARTIES TO PURSUE ALTERNATIVE SETTLEMENT PROCEDURES; [proposed] ORDER

21 WAL-MART STORES, INC.,

22

Defendant.

Judge: Hon. Charles R. Breyer

23

24

25

26

27

28

JOINT STIPULATION CV 12-3885 CRB

Case3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document13 Filed11/20/12 Page2 of 5

1 Case Background

2

Plaintiffs Center for Independent Living, Inc., Janet Brown and Lisa Kilgore (collectively

3 “Plaintiffs”) filed a Class Action Complaint to initiate this action on July 25, 2012 seeking

4 declaratory relief, injunctive relief, damages, and attorneys’ fees and costs on behalf of a

5 proposed class of individuals with mobility disabilities. Plaintiffs’ Complaint alleges generally

6 that Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.’s (“Wal-Mart”) use and placement of point of sale terminals

7 at Wal-Mart stores in California violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”),

8 California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act (“Unruh Act”) and portions of the California Disabled

9 Persons Act (“CDPA”), specifically California Civil Code §§54-54.3. Docket No. 1. Wal-Mart

10 denies the allegations in Plaintiffs’ Complaint, denies that Plaintiffs are entitled to any remedy,

11 relief, or damages, and further denies that Plaintiffs have been damaged in any amount or at all.

12

Upon the filing of the Complaint, Plaintiffs received the Court’s “Scheduling Order For

13 Cases Asserting Denial of Right of Access Under Americans with Disabilities Act Title II & III

14 (42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-89).” Docket No.2. The Scheduling Order, which applies the timelines

15 suggested in the Court’s General Order No. 56, established the following schedule:

16 Date

Event

Rule(s)

17 7/25/2012

Complaint filed

18 9/24/2012 19

Last day for plaintiff to complete service on defendants or file motion for administrative relief from deadline

General Order 56; Civil Local Rule 7-11

20 7 days before Joint Site Inspection
21

Last day for parties to complete initial disclosures, including defendant’s disclosure re construction or alteration history of subject premises

FRCivP 26(a); General Order 56 ¶2;

22 11/7/2012 23

Last day for parties and counsel to hold joint inspection of premises, with or without meet-andconfer regarding settlement

General Order 56 ¶3,4;

24 28 business days after Last day for parties to meet and confer in person to General Order 56

Joint Site Inspection discuss settlement

¶4;

25

42 days after Joint Last day for plaintiff to file “Notice of Need for

General Order 56

26 Site Inspection

Mediation”

¶7;

27 7 calendar days after Last day for plaintiff to file Motion for

General Order 56

mediation

Administrative Relief Requesting Case Management ¶8; Civil Local

28

Conference

Rule 7-11

JOINT STIPULATION CV 12-3885 CRB
- 2 -

Case3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document13 Filed11/20/12 Page3 of 5

1 The Parties’ Stipulated Request

2

The parties have met and conferred regarding the applicability of the Scheduling Order

3 and General Order No. 56 to the case and have discussed exploring whether this case can be

4 settled on a class wide basis without the need for further litigation. General Order No. 56 – with

5 its early facility inspection requirements – does not appear to be designed for class actions

6 involving multiple facilities such as the instant case. In order to facilitate further settlement

7 discussions among the parties, to accommodate the very busy upcoming holiday season, and in

8 the interest of preserving resources, the parties have discussed and now propose an alternative

9 stipulated schedule to the Court. The alternative stipulated schedule would permit the parties to

10 explore the possibility of settlement using procedures that differ from those set forth in the

11 Scheduling Order and General Order No. 56, yet that are similarly focused on determining

12 whether this class action, which alleges access violations, can be resolved prior to appearing

13 before the Court for an initial case management conference. The parties further submit that this

14 case is styled as a class action; that, if a class were to be certified, the Court and the parties could

15 become embroiled in expensive and time-consuming litigation relating to placement and

16 accessibility of point of sale devices in potentially hundreds of stores throughout the state; and

17 that it is more efficient and more likely to promote the potential settlement of this action if the

18 parties forgo the joint site inspection required under General Order No. 56 of alleged barriers at a

19 specific Wal-Mart store, and instead proceed to facilitated mediation.

20

The parties’ proposal ensures that the underlying goals of General Order No. 56 are

21 accomplished by proposing: the exchange of initial disclosures required under Federal Rule of

22 Civil Procedure 26(a)(1); the exchange of information described in General Order No. 56, ¶¶ 2-6;

23 and that a mediator preside over settlement negotiations. The parties’ proposal extends by a few

24 months the schedule established by the Scheduling Order and General Order No. 56 to allow

25 sufficient time for attempting to resolve the case prior to the parties’ appearance at an initial case

26 management conference. Due to the nature of this case, the parties submit that this additional

27 time is warranted and will facilitate settlement negotiations.

28 / /

JOINT STIPULATION CV 12-3885 CRB
- 3 -

Case3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document13 Filed11/20/12 Page4 of 5

1

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between and among the parties by and through their

2 respective counsel of record, subject to the approval of the Court, which Plaintiffs and Defendant

3 jointly request, as follows:

4

• The parties shall be relieved of their obligations to comply with the Scheduling

5

Order and General Order No. 56.

6

• On or before December 19, 2012: The parties shall complete the Initial

7

Disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

8

• On or before April 19, 2013: The parties shall attend mediation before a mutually

9

agreed upon mediator at JAMS Arbitration, Mediation and ADR services, or such

10

other mediation service as the parties may select, for the purpose of discussing the

11

complete resolution of Plaintiffs’ claims. Prior to the mediation the parties agree

12

to exchange information and documents relevant to the parties’ dispute that may

13

facilitate settlement, including the information required by General Order No. 56,

14

¶¶ 2-6. If the parties are unable to conclude a mediation prior this date, the parties

15

agree to promptly inform the Court.

16

• On or before May 10, 2013: The parties agree to submit to the Court a Status

17

Report informing the Court of the status of their settlement negotiations.

18

• On or before May 10, 2013: If the parties are unable to resolve the case prior to

19

this date the parties shall also file a Joint Case Management Conference Statement

20

providing all information required by the Court’s Standing “Order Setting Case

21

Management Conference” (dated May 9, 2011).

22

• On Friday, May 17, 2013, at 8:30 a.m., in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, 450 Golden

23

Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California, or as is convenient for the Court: The

24

parties shall appear for a Case Management Conference pursuant to Rule 16 of the

25

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure before Judge Charles R. Breyer.

26 / /

27 / / 28 / /

JOINT STIPULATION CV 12-3885 CRB
- 4 -

Case3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document13 Filed11/20/12 Page5 of 5

UNITED S ALIFORNIA

OURT NORTH

1 Respectfully Submitted,

2 Dated: November 19, 2012

DISABILITY RIGHTS ADVOCATES

3

4

By: /s/ Kevin Knestrick

5

Kevin Knestrick

6

Counsel for Plaintiffs

7 Dated: November 19, 2012 8 9 10 11

JONES DAY
By: /s/ Robert A. Naeve Robert A. Naeve
Counsel for Defendant WAL-MART STORES, INC.

12

13 14

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED. TATES DISTRICT C

15 16
Dated: November _2_1, 2012 17 18 19 20 21

IT IS SO ORDERED
By: TUNhnoeirtteHhdeorSnnotaDrtaeibJssutlredDigcCietshtoCrafihrcClateraCslleoiRsfuo.RrrBt.nJBrieuarydeegyreer
ERN DISTRICT OF C

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

JOINT STIPULATION CV 12-3885 CRB
- 5 -

 
 UQ<H0H0 o(-1H

o H Fr; 2 04 v•.)

P

\ CD

CD

PL,1

s,-)

Z
-1

cl) E; "

LAURENCE W. PARADIS (Bar No. 122336)

KEVIN KNESTRICK (Bar No. 229620)

CHRISTINE CHUANG (Bar No. 257214)

DISABILITY RIGHTS ADVOCATES

2001 Center Street, Fourth Floor

Berkeley, California 94704

Telephone: (510) 665-8644

Facsimile: (510) 665-8511

TTY:

(510) 665-8716

Email:

general@dralegal.org

ARLENE MAYERSON (Bar No. 79310) DISABILITY RIGHTS EDUCATION AND DEFENSE FUND, INC. 3075 Adeline Street, Suite 210 Berkeley, California 94703 Telephone: (510) 644-2555 Fax/TTY: (510) 841-8645 amayerson@dredforg

BILL LANN LEE (Bar No. 108452)

CATHA WORTHMAN (Bar No. 230399)

LEWIS FEINBERG LEE RENAKER & JACKSON, P.C.

476 9th Street

Oakland, California 94607

Telephone: (510) 839-6824

bleeale

r corL

cworthman(Oewisfeinhergssmn

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING, INC., JANET BROWN, and LISA KILGORE on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
WAL-MART STORES, INC.,
Defendant.

Case No. C 12-3885 CRB
CLASS ACTION
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION REQUESTING APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL PURSUANT TO RULE 23(G)
Hearing: April 12, 2013 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: Courtroom 6, 17th Floor Judge: Hon. Charles R. Breyer

[PROPOSED] ORDER WHEREAS, the Court has ordered that the cases Center For Independent Living, Inc. et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Case No. 3:12-CV-03885-CRB ("CIL") and Partida v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Case No. C 13-00305 KAW ("Partida") are related; WHEREAS, Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. has filed an unopposed motion pursuant to Rule 42 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure seeking consolidation of the above-captioned matters; WHEREAS, Plaintiffs' Counsel in CIL has filed a motion pursuant to Rule 23(g) requesting appointment as interim class counsel in the CIL and Partida cases;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiffs' Motion Requesting Appointment of DRA, DREDF, and Lewis Feinberg as Interim Class Counsel Pursuant to Rule 23(g) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT Plaintiffs' interim class counsel shall be generally responsible for coordinating the activities of Plaintiffs during pretrial proceedings, and shall have authority over the following matters on behalf of all plaintiffs and the putative class in the CIL and Partida actions, including:
1. Determining and presenting (in briefs, oral argument, or such other fashion as may be appropriate, personally or by a designee) to the Court and opposing parties the position of the putative class on all matters arising during pretrial proceedings;
2. Designating which attorneys may appear at hearings and conferences with the Court; 3. Designating which attorneys may appear at settlement negotiations on behalf of the
putative class and conducting settlement negotiations with defendant; 4. Entering into stipulations, with opposing counsel, necessary for the conduct of the
litigation; 5. Determining the scope, order, and conduct of all discovery proceedings; 6. Retaining plaintiffs' experts; 7. Maintaining adequate time and disbursement records covering services as interim class

CIL et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Case No. C 12-3885 CRB

[PROPOSED' Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion Requesting Appointment of Interim Class Counsel

1

counsel; 8. Ensuring that schedules are met and unnecessary expenditures of time and funds are
avoided; 9. Assigning such work assignments to other counsel as they may deem appropriate; 10. Performing such other duties as may be incidental to proper coordination of plaintiffs'
pretrial activities or authorized by further order of the Court, including the drafting and/or filing of all pleadings, orders, and correspondence necessary to conduct the litigation; and 11. Planning and coordinating, to the extent practicable, with all related actions filed for all discovery, law and motion practice and related matters, to ensure the efficient prosecution of the consolidated cases.

IT IS SO ORDERED

Dated: April 1

, 2013

The Honorable Charles R. Breyer United States District Court Judge Northern District of California

CIL et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Case No. C 12-3885 CRB

'PROPOSED] Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion Requesting Appointment of Interim Class Counsel

2

 
 1 Robert A. Naeve (State Bar No. 106095) rnaeve@jonesday.com
2 Steven M. Zadravecz (State Bar No. 185676) szadravecz@jonesday.com
3 Mark E. Earnest (State Bar No. 253490) mearnest@jonesday.com
4 JONES DAY 3161 Michelson Drive
5 Suite 800 Irvine, CA 92612.4408
6 Telephone: (949) 851-3939 Facsimile: (949) 553-7539
7 Attorneys for Defendant
8 WAL-MART STORES, INC.

9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11

12 CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING, INC., JANET BROWN, and LISA KILGORE
13 on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
14 Plaintiff,
15 v.
16 WAL-MART STORES, INC.,
17 Defendant.
18 19 20

Case No. CV 12-3885 CRB Related Case No. C 13-00305 YGR [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT WAL-MART STORES, INC.’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 42 Date: April 12, 2013 Time: 10:00 A.M. Place: 450 Golden Gate Ave., Dept. 6
San Francisco, CA 94102 HON. CHARLES R. BREYER

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Order CV 12-3885 CRB

1

Having read and considered the papers filed and arguments made by the parties with

2 respect to Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.’s Motion to Consolidate Cases Under Federal Rule of

3 Civil Procedure 42, and good cause appearing, the Court ORDERS that the case Center for

4 Independent Living, et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Case No. CV 12-3885 CRB, and the case

5 George Partida v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Case No. C 13-00305 YGR, are consolidated for all

6 purposes.

7 8 Dated: ___A__p_ri_l _3______________, 2013. 9 10

By: Hon. Charles R. Breyer United States District Court Judge

11 IRI-48061v1 12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Order

-1-

CV 12-3885 CRB

 
 Case3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document30 Filed04/25/13 Page1 of 5

1 Robert A. Naeve (CA State Bar No. 106095) rnaeve@jonesday.com
2 Steven M. Zadravecz (State Bar No. 185676) szadravecz@jonesday.com
3 Mark E. Earnest (CA State Bar No. 253490) mearnest@jonesday.com
4 JONES DAY 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 800
5 Irvine, CA 92612.4408 Telephone: (949) 851-3939
6 Facsimile: (949) 553-7539 Attorneys for Defendant
7 WAL-MART STORES, INC.

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10

11 CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT

Lead Case No. C 12-3885 CRB

12 LIVING, INC., JANET BROWN, and

13

LISA KILGORE on behalf of themselves and all others similarly

JOINT STIPULATION TO MODIFY NOVEMBER 2012 ORDER AND [PROPOSED] ORDER THEREON

14 situated,

15 16
v.
17

Plaintiffs,

Judge: Hon. Charles R. Breyer

18 WAL-MART STORES, INC.,

19

Defendant.

20
GEORGE PARTIDA, on behalf of 21 himself and all others similarly
situated,
22
Plaintiff,
23
v.
24
WAL-MART STORES, INC.,
25
Defendant.
26

Consolidated Case No. C 13-00305 YGR

27

28

STIPULATION CV 12-3885 CRB

Case3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document30 Filed04/25/13 Page2 of 5

1

Plaintiffs Center for Independent Living, Inc., Janet Brown, and Lisa Kilgore

2 (collectively, the “CIL Plaintiffs”) and plaintiff George Partida, on the one hand, and defendant

3 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (“Wal-Mart”), on the other hand, enter into this Joint Stipulation with

4 reference to the following facts:

5

RECITALS

6

1. On November 20, 2012, the CIL Plaintiffs and Wal-Mart filed a Joint Stipulation

7 and Motion for Administrative Relief from General Order No. 56 to Permit the Parties to Pursue

8 Alternative Settlement Procedures. (Docket No. 1.) As the parties explained in their Joint

9 Stipulation, they agreed to pursue settlement discussions and alternative dispute resolution prior

10 to appearing before this Court for an initial status conference and prior to engaging in significant

11 litigation.

12

2. On November 21, 2012, this Court granted the parties’ Joint Stipulation, relieved

13 the CIL Plaintiffs and Wal-Mart from their obligations to comply with General Order No. 56, and

14 set forth the following schedule: exchange initial disclosures by December 19, 2012; attend

15 mediation by April 19, 2013; report on mediation results by May 10, 2013; submit a joint case

16 management conference statement by May 10, 2013; and attend a case management conference

17 on May 17, 2013 (the “November 2012 Order”). (Docket No. 2.)

18

3. Consistent with the November 2012 Order, the CIL Plaintiffs and Wal-Mart

19 exchanged initial disclosures, chose a mediator, reserved a mediation date, are conferring on a

20 joint case management conference statement, and are preparing to attend the case management

21 conference next month as scheduled. While the CIL Plaintiffs and Wal-Mart have been working

22 toward mediation, a number of events have transpired since the November 2012 Order was issued

23 that will not enable the parties to complete mediation by the April 19, 2013 deadline.

24

4. For example, shortly after the CIL Plaintiffs commenced their case, George Partida

25 filed a class action complaint against Wal-Mart in Los Angeles Superior Court (Partida v. Wal-

26 Mart Stores, Inc., referred to as the “Partida action”). Like the CIL Plaintiffs, Partida alleges that

27 certain Wal-Mart stores in California employ point-of-sale (“POS”) devices that are inaccessible

28 to disabled patrons who use wheelchairs or scooters. However, Partida’s complaint, unlike the

-2-

STIPULATION CV 12-3885 CRB

Case3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document30 Filed04/25/13 Page3 of 5

1 complaint filed by the CIL Plaintiffs, includes specific allegations regarding at least one particular

2 Sam’s Club stores in California that allegedly employs POS devices that are inaccessible to

3 disabled patrons who use wheelchairs and scooters. One of the CIL Plaintiffs, Janet Brown, has

4 subsequently represented to the Court that she also has experienced allegedly inaccessible POS

5 devices at Sam’s Club Stores in California.

6

5. Wal-Mart removed the Partida action to the Central District and, with the

7 agreement of Partida’s counsel, the action was transferred to Northern District of California on

8 January 28, 2013. After the transfer, however, the Partida action was not automatically assigned

9 to this Court or consolidated with the action filed by the CIL Plaintiffs. Given the significantly

10 overlapping factual and legal issues Wal-Mart filed an administrative motion to relate the Partida

11 action to the instant case filed by the CIL Plaintiffs. This Court ordered the two cases – Partida

12 v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and Center for Independent Living, Inc., et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. –

13 related on March 8, 2013. (Docket No. 19.) On April 3, 2013, following another motion by Wal-

14 Mart, this Court consolidated the Partida action with the present action for all purposes. (Docket

15 No. 28.)

16

6. The procedural steps to consolidate the Partida action with the instant case

17 prosecuted by the CIL Plaintiffs (which included removal from state court, transfer to the

18 Northern District, a motion to relate cases, and motion to consolidate) were necessary to finally

19 determine the scope of claims to be potentially litigated by Wal-Mart and the scope of claims

20 subject to mediation. Put another way, it has taken time to effectuate the procedural steps to

21 finally resolve the scope of the litigation facing Wal-Mart and claims that will be subject to

22 settlement negotiations at the parties’ upcoming mediation. Since the consolidation issue was just

23 resolved two weeks ago, the parties’ ability to finalize a mediation date was delayed.

24

7. The filing of the Partida action also prompted counsel for the CIL Plaintiffs to file

25 a motion to be appointed interim class counsel pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(g).

26 The Court granted that motion on April 3, 2013. (Docket No. 27). In that order, this Court gave

27 the CIL Plaintiffs’ counsel the authority to “[e]nter[] into stipulations, with opposing counsel,

28 necessary for the conduct of the litigation” and designate “which attorneys may appear at

-3-

STIPULATION CV 12-3885 CRB

Case3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document30 Filed04/25/13 Page4 of 5

1 settlement negotiations on behalf negotiations on behalf of the putative class and conducting

2 settlement negotiations with defendant.” (Id.) Until this Court’s order on the interim counsel

3 motion, which also occurred just two weeks ago, it was unclear to Wal-Mart which set of

4 counsel – the attorneys representing the CIL Plaintiffs or the firm representing Partida – would

5 take the lead in settlement negotiations and mediation, or whether several different attorneys, with

6 potentially different views of resolution, would be involved in mediation.

7

8. Now that the Partida and CIL actions have been consolidated for all purposes and

8 interim class counsel has been appointed, the parties are prepared to mediate and potentially to

9 resolve all claims in the two consolidated cases pending before this Court. The parties have

10 agreed to use David Rotman as a mediator and have secured June 7, 2013 as a mediation date.

11 The June 7, 2013 date, however, does not meet the current April 19, 2013 mediation deadline set

12 by this Court’s November 2012 Order.

13

9. The parties are committed to moving this matter forward and to mediation.

14 Accordingly, at this juncture, the parties request only that the mediation deadline be moved from

15 April 19, 2013 to June 7, 2013; that the parties deadline to report on the results of mediation be

16 continued from May 10, 2013 to June 14, 2013; and that the deadline to exchange further

17 information and documents to facilitate mediation occur prior by May 31, 2013. The parties have

18 agreed to adhere to the other dates set forth in this Court’s November 21 Order, which includes

19 filing a Joint Case Management Statement by May 10, 2013 and attending the May 17, 2013 Case

20 Management Conference. Interim Class Counsel will request at the initial Case Management

21 Conference that the Court establish a pre-trial schedule.

22

10. For the reasons outlined above, the parties submit that good cause exists to modify

23 the mediation deadline, mediation report back date, and document exchange date originally

24 established by this Court’s November 2012 Order.

25

26

27

28

-4-

STIPULATION CV 12-3885 CRB

Case3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document30 Filed04/25/13 Page5 of 5
TATES DISTRICT C
22
IT IS SO ORDERED
Judge Charles R. Breyer
ERN DISTRICT OF C

UNITED S ALIFORNIA

OURT NORTH

 
 Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page1 of 42

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page2 of 42

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT defendant Wal-Mart

Wa Stores Inc

Mart hereby removes this matter from the Los Angeles County Superior Court to

the United States District Court for the Central District of California pursuant

to 28

U.S.C

1332 1441 and 1446 The grounds for removal are set forth below

CLAIMS ASSERTED IN COMPLAINT

On August 13 2012 plaintiff George Partida Partida filed his

unverified

Complaint

for Damages and Permanent

Injunctive Relief for Violation

of Unruh Civil Rights Act Complaint

against Wal-Mart in the Los Angeles

County Superior

Court Case No BC488 176 captioned

George Partida on behalf

10

of himself and all others similar/v situated

Wal-Mart Stores Inc

11

Partida seeks class action certification

of two proposed classes one of

12

which would include All disabled

California residents confined

to

wheelchair

13

power chair or scooter who were either

unable to use any of the credit or debit

14

card readers at

California

Sams Club at any time within the two years before

15

filing of this action because the available card readers at the store were all mounted

16

too high above the floor to reach or

were deterred from patronizing

any

17

Sams California

Club store at any time within the two years before filing of this

18

action because the available card readers at the store were all mounted too high

19

above the floor to reach The second proposed class Partida seeks to certi would

20

include All disabled California residents confined

to

wheelchair power chair or

21

scooter who were either

unable to use any of the credit or debit card readers at

22

California Walmart

at any time within the two years before filing of this action

23

because the available card readers at the store were all mounted too high above the

24

floor to reach or

were deterred from patronizing

any California Walmart

25

store at any time within the two years before filing of this action because the

26

available card readers at the store were all mounted too high above the floor to

27 reach Compl 15

28

\Vul-Marts

Notice of Removal

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page3 of 42

Partida asserts claims on his own behalf and on behalf of the proposed

Unruh Act classes for violations of the Llnruh Civil Rights Act

citing to both

the California Civil Code and the Americans with Disabilities

Act Compl

29 Partida seeks statutory damages

injunctive relief and attorneys fees

23

Compl Prayer COMPLIANCE

WITH STATUTORY

REQUIREMENTS

On October 31 2012 Partida served Wal-Mart with the Complaint

Wal-Marts

removal of this action is timely because it filed the instant Notice of

Removal within 30 days of the date Partida served Wal-Mart with the Complaint

10

See 28 U.S.C

1446b In accordance with 28 U.S.C

1446a copies of

ii

Partidas Summons and Complaint are attached to this Notice of Removal as

12

Exhibit

13

Wal-Mart

filed its Answer to the Complaint

in state court on

14 November 20 2012

copy of Wal-Marts

Answer is attached to this Notice of

15

Removal as Exhibit

16

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C

1446d Wal-Mart

will provide

written notice

17

of removal of this action to Partidas counsel and will promptly file

copy of this

18

Notice of Removal and the operative additional documents

with the Clerk of the

19

Los Angeles County Superior Court

courtesy copy of Wal-Marts Notice to

20

State Court and Adverse Party of Removal of Civil Action from State Court to the

21

United States District Court for the Central District of California without

22

exhibits is attached to this Notice of Removal as Exhibit

23

VENUE AND INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT

24

Venue lies in the United States District Court for the Central District

25

of California pursuant

to 28 U.S.C

1391a and 1441a because the Complaint

26

was filed in this District

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C

1a 144

this case may properly

27

be assigned to the Western Division of the Central District of California because

28

Partida filed this case in the Los Angeles County Superior

Court

Wal-Marfs

Notice of Removal

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page4 of 42

JURISDICTION

Diversity

Jurisdiction

U.S.C

This Court has original

jurisdiction

over this matter pursuant

to 28

1332 because this is an action between citizens of different States and

the matter in controversy interest and costs

exceeds the sum or value of $75000 exclusive of

Partida and Waf-Mart are Citizens of Different States

Partida alleges he is resident of California Compi

and is

therefore

citizen of California for purposes of diversity

Wal-Mart is

10

corporation

incorporated

under the laws of Delaware with its principal place of

11

business i.e its headquarters

and nerve center located in Bentonville Arkansas

12

Compl

Accordingly

for purposes of removal Wal-Mart

is

citizen of the

13

states of Delaware and Arkansas

28 U.S.C

1332c1 see The Hertz Corp

14

Friend 130

Ct 1181 1192-93 2010

15

The Amount in Controversy Exceeds $75000

16

10

Partidas Complaint does not allege

specific

dollar amount in

17

damages but asserts claims for statutory damages and attorneys

fees Compl

18

Prayer Although Wal-Mart does not concede liability in any way the amount

19

Partida places in controversy

exceeds the $75000 jurisdictional

minimum 28

20

U.S.C

1332a see also Gibson

Chrysler Corp 261 F.3d 927 941 9th Cir

21 2001

22

11

First Claim for Reliet Violation of Unruh Act at Sams Club Partida

23

alleges that he shopped at Sams Club several times each month for the past 10 or

24

more years and that he intends to continue to shop there Compl

Partida

25

Sams further alleges that credit card readers in

Club stores are inaccessible

for

26

individuals

with mobility

disabilities

because the readers are mounted too high for

27 wheelchair users Compl

12 He claims to have personally encountered these

28

alleged barriers

16d during his shopping trips to Sams Club Compl IJ 13

-4-

Wal-Marts

Notice of Remoa

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page5 of 42

21 and that these barriers prevented him from independently

using the credit card

readers in violation of the Unruh Act as well as regulations

Americans with Disabilities

Act Compl

23

promulgated

under the

12

Based upon these allegations

the Complaint is reasonably

and

conservatively

read to plead that Partida purportedly

encountered inaccessible

credit card readers on at least one occasion during his several monthly shopping

trips to Sams Club stores

Partida seeks to recover $4000 in statutory

damages

Cal Civ Code

52 for each such encounter

Hence the amount in controversy

arising from Partidas first claim for relief is at least $96000 in statutory penalties

10 $4000

violation per month

24 months

$96000

11

13

Second Claim for Reliet Violation of Unruh Act at Wal-Mart

Partida

12

alleges that he shopped at Wal-Mart

several times each month for the

13

approximately

years and that he intends to continue to shop there Compl

14

Partida further alleges that credit card readers in Wal-Mart

stores are

IS

inaccessible

for individuals

with mobility

disabilities

because the readers are

16

mounted too high for wheelchair users Compl

12 He claims to have

17

personally encountered

these alleged barriers

during his shopping trips to Wal

IS

16d 21 Mart Compl IJ 13

and that these barriers prevented

him from

19

independently

using the credit card readers in violation of the lJnruh Act as well as

20

regulations

promulgated

under the Americans with Disabilities

Act Compl

29

21

14

Based upon these allegations

the Complaint

is reasonably

and

22

conservatively

read to plead that Partida purportedly

encountered inaccessible

23

credit card readers on at least one occasion

during his several

monthly shopping

24

trips to Wal-Mart

stores Partida seeks to recover

$4000 in statutory damages Cal

25

Civ Code

52 for each such encounter

Hence the amount in controversy

arising

26

from Partidas

second claim for relief is at least $96000 in statutory penalties

27 $4000

violation per month

24 months

$96000

28

WaI-Marts

Notice of Removal

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page6 of 42

15

Attorneys

attorneys

fees pursuant

Fees Partida contends that he is entitled to recover his

Compl to California Civil Code section 52

Prayer

Attorneys

fees are properly included

in the amount in controversy

for purposes of

evaluating diversity jurisdiction

See e.g Gait G/S

.155 Scandinavia

142 F.3d

1150 1156 9th Cir 1998 Even modest amount of attorneys fees further

increases the amount in controversy

beyond the jurisdictional

minimum

16

Summary of Partidas Amount In Controversy The amount-in

controversy

requirement for traditional

diversity jurisdiction

is satisfied

Even

without quantiing Partidas claim for attorneys

fees Partidas individual claims

10

place in controversy

more than $75000 $96000

Act violations at Sams

11

Club in Torrance California

$96000

Act violations at Wal-Mart in

12

Torrance California

192000 While this is the amount in controversy Wal

13

Mart nevertheless

disputes

that Partida is entitled to recover

anything by virtue of

14

this action

15

17

Because this Court has original jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C

16

1332a over Partidas individual claims it has supplemental jurisdiction that

17

extends to the claims of the unnamed proposed class members See Exxon Mobil

18

Corp

AIlapattah Servs Inc 545 U.S 546 549 2005 holding that where the

19

other elements of

jurisdiction

are present and at least one named plaintiff

20

in the action satisfies the amount-in-controversy

requirement

1367 authorizes

21

supplemental jurisdiction

over the claims of other plaintiffs in the same Article III

22

case or controversy even if those claims are for less than the jurisdictional

amount

23

specified in the statute setting forth the requirements

for diversity jurisdiction

24

Gibson 261 F.3d at 940 holding that there is supplemental jurisdiction over the

25

claims of unnamed class members when the claim of an individual named plaintiff

26

satisfies the amount-in-controversy

requirement

27

28

-6-

Wal-Marts

Notice of Removal

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page7 of 42

Class Action Fairness Act Jurisdiction

18

In addition

this Court has original

jurisdiction

over this matter

pursuant to 28 U.S.C

1332d as amended by the class

2005 Pub

CAFA No 109-2 119 Stat 14

Under

Action Section

Fairness
1332d

Act of federal

courts have original

diversity jurisdiction

over

class action whenever

any

member of defendant

class of plaintiffs is

citizen of State different

from any

the matter in controversy

exceeds the sum or value of $5000000

exclusive of interest and costs
plaintiff classes in the aggregate

and

the number of members

is more than 100 28 U.S.C

of all proposed
5B 1332d2

10

As explained

below

CAFA all

requirements

are satisfied

in this case

Ii

Partida and Wal-Mart are Citizens of Different States

12

19

CAFA Under

only minimal diversity i.e diversity between any

13

plaintiff and any defendant

is required

28 U.S.C

1332d2A As noted

14

above there is complete diversity here because Partida is citizen of the State of

15

California while Wal-N4art is citizen of the States of Delaware

and Arkansas

16

Thus minimal and complete diversity are satisfied

17

The Amount in Controversy Exceeds 55000000

18

20

Partidas Complaint

does not allege

specific

dollar amount in

19

damages but asserts claims for statutory damages and attorneys

fees Compl

20

Prayer Although Wal-Mart

concedes neither liability on Partidas claims nor the

propriety or breadth of the classes as alleged by Partida the amount Partida places

22

in controversy

with his class claims exceeds the $5000000 jurisdictional

minimum

23

under CAFA See 28 U.S.C

1332d

24

21

Class Claims for Relief Violation of Unruh Act at Sams Club and

2D

Wal-Mart

Partida alleges that credit card readers in Sams Club and Wal-Mart

26

stores are inaccessible

for individuals

with mobility

disabilities

because the readers

27

are mounted too high for wheelchair users Compl

12 He claims to have

28

personally encountered

these alleged barriers

during his shopping trips to Sams

-7-

Wal-Marts

Notice of Removal

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page8 of 42

Comp Club and Wal-Mart

16d 27 13

21

and that these barriers prevented

him from independently

using the credit card readers in violation of the Unruh Act

as well as regulations promulgated

under the Americans with Disabilities

Act

Compl 23 29

22

Further Partida purports to represent

class ofat least several

Comp thousand members who have encountered similar barriers

16a

Based upon these allegations

the Complaint

is reasonably

and conservatively

construed

to plead

class of at least 2000 members and that each proposed class

member encountered inaccessible

credit card readers on at least one occasion

10

Partida seeks to recover $4000 in statutory

damages Cal Civ Code

52 for each

11

such encounter

Hence the amount in controversy

arising from Partidas class

12

claims

for relief is at least $8000000 in statutory

penalties $4000 per violation

13

2000 members

$8000000

14

23

Attorneys Fees As noted above Partida alleges that he is entitled to

15

recover his attorneys

Compl fees pursuant to California Civil Code section 52

16

Prayer Even

modest amount of attorneys

fees further increases the amount in

17

controversy

beyond the jurisdictional

minimum

18

24

Summary of Proposed Classes Amount In Controversy

The amount-

19

in-controversy

CAFA requirement for

jurisdiction

is satisfied

Even without

20

quantifying

Partidas claim for attorneys

fees the amount in controversy

with

21

respect to the class claims exceeds $5000000 While $8000000 is the amount in

22

controversy Wal-Mart nevertheless

disputes

that Partida or any proposed

class

23

member is entitled to recover

anything

by virtue of this action

24

Number of Putative Class Members

25

25

third requirement

to invoke CAFA jurisdiction

is that the

26

aggregate

number of members

of all proposed

plaintiff classes be more than 100

27 28 U.S.C

l332d5B

Here Partida alleges that there are at least several

28

thousand affected class members Compl

16a Thus this requirement for

-8-

Wal-Marts

Notice of Removal

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page9 of 42

CAFA jurisdiction has been met

RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

26

In alleging the amount in controversy

Wa for purposes of removal

Mart does not concede in any way that the allegations

in the Complaint

are

accurate or that Partida or any proposed

class member is entitled to class

certification damages

injunctive relief attorneys

fees or any other relief Wa-

Mart reserves its right to defend the allegations

in the Complaint

to the ftillest

extent

27

Based on the foregoing

this actiom-i

properly

removed to this Court

10

from the Los Angeles County Superior Court

11

Dated November 21 2012

12

JONES pAY

13

By

RobertA Naeve

14

AttorneYs

for Defendant

WAL-N2IART STORES INC

16

17

18

23 24 25 26 27

WaI-Marfs

Notice of Removal

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page10 of 42
EXHIBIT

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page11 of 42

SUMMONS
CITACION JUDICIAL
NOTICE TO DEFENDANT AVISOALDEMANDADO WAL-MART STORES INC

SUM-I 00
FOR COURT USE ONLY
SOLO PAPA USC 05 LA ORTE
.t

YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF
tO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE GEORGE PARTIDA on behalf of himself
cituated

and all others similarly

AUG 42012
Lcputy

NOTICE

You have been sued The cowl may decide against

you without

your being heard unless you respond

within 30 days Read

the information

below

You have 30 CALENDAR

DAYS

after this summons

and legal

papers are served on you to file

written response

at this court

and have

copy

served

on the

plaintiff

letter or phone

call

will

not protect

you Your wntten response

must be in proper legal

form if you want the court to hear your

case

There may be

court form that you can use for your response

You can find these court

forms and more information

at the California

Courts

Online

Self-Help

Center fwww cow/info

ce gov/seiftielp

your county law library

or the courthouse

nearest

you If you cannot pay the filing

fee ask

me court dark for

fee waiver form It you do not file your response

on time you may lose ths case by default and your wages money

and property

may be taken without

further wamsig

There are other legal requirements

from the court You may want

to call

an attorney

right away

If you

referral service

If you cannot afford an attorney you may be eligible

for free

legal

services

these

nonprofit

groups at the Catifomia

Legal Services Web site isww law he/pcahfornia.org

www aiurtinfo

ce govIselfire

or by contacting

your toot court or county bar association

costs

on any settlement

or arbitration

award

of $10000 or more in

civil case The courts

do not from

know an attorney you

nonprofit

sgat services

may wanl to ott an attomey

program

You can locate

the California

Courts Online Setf.4tetp

Center

NOTE The
lien must be

court paid

has before

statutory the court

lien tor waived fees and

will dismiss

the case

/ISO 1.0 han demandado

Si no responde

denfro

de 30 dies Ia cotta pueHe

decidtr

en su confra

sin escucflar sit version Lea

informacicin

continuaocin

ene 30 DIAlS 0E C4LENDARIO

ciaspuiss

cia qua Ia enfreguen

esra

ofaciOn

papa/es

/egales

para presenter

una respu es/a pot escnfo en es/a

carte

hacer qua se entregue

tine ccpse at ciemancianfe

Una car/a

una llamada telefonica

no Jo profegen

Sit respciesfa

pot escnf

hone qua esfar

en fonnwo /ega/

Puede

enconfrar

cxlirecfo

iv desea

es/os

formulanos

que procesen

cia

code

su caso en Ia coda

mda inkmntiacicin

an

Es postble

que haya

tin itmru/ano

at Cenfro cia Ayuda

cia las Codes

qua us/ed de California

pueda user pare su respuesla

www.suco.te.ca.gov

en ía

bbtioieca

cie Ieyes

cia su oinciac/o

en ía code

qua /e quacie

mds cerca

Si no puacie pagar ía cuofa cia presenf scion

pit/a at secretano

cia Ia cone

7ue edo tin ibrmu/ano

oat/na

gui/at

su sueide

de exencion cia pago de cuotas

Si no prasanfa

dinero

bienes sin mas adverfencia

su respuesfa

fiempo

puecie pettier

at caso

pot ncunipiimienro

code Ia

Flay orros

raquisttos

age/es

Es recvrnendab/e

que llama

tin abogart

inmecialanenta

Si no conoce

un abogacb

puede

i/amer

un servioo He

remisiOn programs

abogados de servicos

Www.tawhelpcalifornia.org

Si no puerie

legs/es

sin

pager

un abogac/o

fines

cia /ucia

Puec/a

an at Cenrro cia Ayucie

cia

es posibie enconfrar las Codas

que cumpla es/os grupos He California

con los requistos

sin fines

cia tucro

www sucorte.ca

para obtenar

servic/os

/egates

graluifos

de

web an at 54/ to

de California

Legal Services

gov

poniOnHese

en confacfo con /a coda

un at

cofegro

cie abogacios

/oca/es

V/SO Pot lay Ia cotta

fiene clerecho

reciamar as cuofas

los cosfos esanfos par imponer tin gravaman

andre

cue/quiet

recuperacidn

cia 310.0000

miss He va/or recibicie

macban/a

un acuenio

tine concasion

cia arbitraje

en tin cast cia cieiecno

civi/

Tieria

que

pagar ad gravamen

cia Ia con/a

anres cia qua Ia cotta puacia desachar

caso

The name El nombre

and address direction

of the court is
as tie/a code

Los Angeles

County

Central 111

District Stanley Hill Street Los

Mosk Angeles

Courthouse

Unlimited

CA 900 12-3014

Superior Court Jurisdiction

cass iuMeeR timti OW cflOr

BC488 176

The name El nombre

acidress

and

Ia directiOn

telephone
at nUmem

Julie Mehrban Esq 15233

number

of plaintiffs

attorney

de /a/dlbno

del abogado

del

Ventura Boulevard

Suite

or plaintiff

without an attorney

is

damandenfe

tie demandente

qua no frena abogado

es

1000 Sherma1i Oaks CA 91403 310-694-8331

DATE Fec/ia For proof

of sarvrce

____ john

Clarke

lhis summons

use Proof of Serv/ce

Clerk

by

Sacrafano

of Summons form

GINA
P08-010

Para prueba da anfrega

tie esta of a/iOn use e/ form ulano Proof of Service

of Summons

P08-010

NCTICE TO THE PERSON SERVED You are served

issAit

as an individual

defendant

as the person

te sued under

fictitious

name of specil

RIDER

Deputy
Adunto

ro AatciaO

iv Man4aICny

us

..coal Comet

Cavionna

suw.iia

tRea

July

SCSI

on behalf of spec4

AJQ

under

EJ

CCP 416 10 corporatton

CCP 416.20 defunct

corporabon

CCP4140association

or partnership

other spect4

by personal

delivery on date

SUMMONS

CCP 416.60 minor CCP 416.70 conservatee CCP 416 90authonzed

person

Coda

Paqilof

1CM Priocadwa

4441220 445

.waiiClnft

go

Arencai LeqaiNeti

Formsbiwitvw

caf

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page12 of 42

Julie Mehrban Bar No 271290 MEHRBAN LAW CORPORATION

A.P.C

15233 Ventura Boulevard

Suite 1000

Sherman Oaks California 91403-2251

Telephone

310-694-8331

Facsimile 310-882-5809

Email Julie@JulieMehrban.com Website www.MehrbanLaw.com

Attorney for Plaintiff George Partida

CONFORMED COPY

County

of Los Anoeles

AUG 13 2012

A9o tLt John By

Exacvs.Q9r/Cterk irOsç.y

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

10

COUNTY OF LCS ANGELES CENTRAL DISTRICT STANLEY MOSK COURTHOUSE

II

UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

12 GEORGE PARTIDA on behalf of himself and

Case No

all others similarly situated 13

ACTION

Plaintiff 14
15
NC WAIL-MART STORES

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND
PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF FOR
VIOLATION OF UNRUH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT JURY TRIAL DEMAND

l6 Defendant

17

Plaintiff GEORGE PARTIDA on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated

and

18
demanding 19

trial by jury complains

and alleges

upon information and belief as follows

JURISDICTION

20

This is an action seeking

injunctive

relief and statutory damages

pursuant to the Unrub Civil

21

Rights Act California

Civil Code section 51 et seq This Court has jurisdiction

over the class

-7-

action claims alleged

herein pursuant

to California

Code of Civil Procedure

section 382

23

\\\
24

Class Action Complaint

for Violation

of The Unrub Civil Rights Act

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page13 of 42

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

VENUE

Venue is proper in Los Angeles County puisuant to Code of Civil Procedure

section 395

subdivision

and 395.5 Liability arises in Los Angeles County Defendant

has been

committing the acts alleged

herein in Los Angeles

County

and violating the rights of disabled

persons

in Los Angeles County causing them injury

PARTIES

Plaintiff GEORGE PARTIDA is an individual

citizen of California

and resides

in Los Angeles

County GEORGE PARTIDA is unable to walk confined to his power wheelchair and

dependent thereon

ADA for mobility He has disability within the meaning of the

42 U.S.C

121022A and

physical

disability as that term is defined in applicable

California law

including

California Government Code section 12926

Defendant

WAL-MART STORES INC is Delaware corporation

headquartered

in

Bentonville Arkansas

WAL-MART STORES INC is multi-billion

dollar

publicly

traded

company that operates

Sams Club and Walmart

stores throughout

the state of California

Plaintiff seeks full and equal access

to credit or debit Card Readers in all California

Sams Club

and Walmart store locations

service offered by said Defendants
FACTS

California

retail stores

GEORGE PARTIDA is resident of Torrance

California is currently an active Sams Club

member and has been since approximately

1990

GEORGE PARTIDA

has been an active Sams Club member for approximately

20 years and is

long-term

customer of Sams Club GEORGE PARTIDA

has shopped there several

times each

month for the past 10 or more years and intends to continue to shop there

Class Action Complaint

for Violation

of The Unruh Civil Rights

Act

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page14 of 42

GEORGE PARTIDA is long-term customer of Walmart and has shopped there seven times

each month for approximately

years and intends to continue to shop there

During the preceding two years WAL-MART STORES INC has operated Sams Club retail

stores throughout California

that are available

to members

only Customers

who wish to become

members must pay membership

fees and receive

membership

cards that the customers

use to

access the store to browse product and make purchases

Sams Club stores purportedly

give

customers

special access to various items including

household

goods electronics

groceries

clothing

and toys which it advertises

are sold at very low prices

10

During the preceding two years WAL-MART STORES INC has operated Walmart retail stores

10

throughout

California

that sell various

items including

household

goods electronics

groceries

11

clothing

and toys which it advertises

are sold at very low prices Walmart

stores do not require

12
13 11
14

patrons to purchase membership

WAL-MART STORES INC offers credit or debit card readers also known as point of sale

terminals

hereinafter

Card Readers

that allow Sams Club and Walmart

customers

various

15
16 12
17 18 19

payment options

in completing

purchases

made at said California

store locations

While many of Defendants

Sams Club and Walmart

stores offer accessible

Card Readers other

California Sams Club and Walmart

locations

have not made any modifications

Even despite

that Defendant

is on notice of the violations

herein and has demonstrated

that it is fully capable

of making these changes WAL-MART STORES INC has continued to fad and refuse to offer

20

accessible

Card Readers to the disabled Card Readers at these forgotten

locations

have been

.21

mounted

at inaccessthle

heights above the eye level of person in

seated position Hence

they

22

could not be independently used by wheelchair-bound

customers

if at all As

result said card

23

24

Class Action Complaint

for Violation

of The Unrub Civil Rights Act

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page15 of 42

readers

constitute architectural

barriers

as they are physical

aspects

of California

Sams Club and

Walmart

stores that impede full and equal access to those in wheelchairs

13

During the preceding

two years GEORGE PARTIDA

wanted but was unable to independently

use the available

Card Readers in California Sams Club and Walmart stores because they were

too high for him to view and select options and enter information from his seated position

14

This action concerns approximately

33 Sams Club store locations

throughout the state of

California

and more than 150 Walmart store locations

throughout California

CLASS ALLEGATIONS

15

Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and all those similarly

situated

as

class action

10

pursuant

to California

Code of Civil Procedure

section 382 The classes

which Plaintiff seeks to

11

represent is composed of and defmed as follows

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
16

All disabled

California residents confined

scooter

who were either

unable to use

readers

at California

Sams Club at any

to wheelchair

power chair or

any of the credit or debit card

time within the two years before

filing of this action because the available

card readers

at the store were all

mounted too high above the floor to reach or

were deterred from

patronizing

any California Sams Club store at any time within the two

years before

filing of this action because the available

card readers

at the

store were all mounted too high above the floor to reach

AND

All disabled

California residents confined

scooter

who were either

unable to use

to any

wheelchair of the credit

power chair or
or debit card

readers

at California Walmart

at any time within the two years before

filing of this action because the available

card readers

at the store were all

mounted

too high above the floor to reach or

were deterred from

patronizing

any California

Walmart

store at any time within the two years

before

filing of this action because the available

card readers

at the store

were all mounted

too high above

the floor to reach

This action has been brought and may properly

be maintained as

class action pursuant to the

provisions

of California Code of Civil procedure

section

382 because there is

well-defined

23

community

of interest and the proposed

class is easily ascertainable

24

Class Action Complaint

for Violation

of The Unruh Civil Rights Act

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page16 of 42

10
12
14 IS 16 17
19 20 21 22 23 24

Numerosity The Plaintiff Class is so numerous

that the individual

joinder

of all members

is impracticable

under the circuxthtances

of this case While the exact number of class

members

is unknown to plaintiff at this time plaintiff is informed and believes

that there

are at least several

thousand affected class members

in California Therefore joinder

of

all members of the Plaintiff Class is not practical

Common Questions Predominate Common questions

of law and fact exist as to all

members of the Plaintiff Class and predominate

over any questions

which affect only

individual

members of the class These questions

of law and fact include without

limitation

Whether Defendant

violated

the Unruh Civil Rights Act by its failure to

provide

card readers

at

height accessible

to those confined to

ii
iii

wheelchairs

The scope and duration

of Defendants

failure to provide

card readers

at

height accessible

to those confined to wheelchairs

Whether Defendant

maintains any policy regarding

accessible

architecture

and design and if so the extent of Defendants

failure to implement

such

policy

iv

To what extent Defendants

failure to provide card readers

at

height

accessible

to those confined to wheelchairs entitles Plaintiff and the

Plaintiff Class to damages

and injunctive

relief pursuant

to Civil Code

52 section

subdivision

and

The appropriate

nature of class-wide

equitable

relief

Class Action Complaint

for Violation

of The Unruh Civil Rights Act

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page17 of 42

10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Typicality

Plaintiffs claim is typical of the members

of the Plaintiff Class Pursuant to

Civil Code section 52 Plaintiff and all members

of the Plaintiff Class are entitled to the

minimum statutory penalty for Defendants

failure to provide card readers

at

height

accessible

to those confined

to wheelchairs

The discrimination

injury and damages

of

Plaintiff and the Plaintiff Class were caused directly by Defendants

wrongful conduct in

violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act

Adequacy

Plaintiff GEORGE PARTIDA

will fairly and adequately

protect

the interest

of the members of the Plaintiff Class Plaintiff

long-term active Sams Club member

and long-term Walmart customer

resides in Los Angeles County California and has

personally

encountered

the violations

herein complained

of on numerous

occasions

while patronizing

Sams Club and Walmart

with the last several

years Plaintiff has

demonstrated

his long-term

commitment this cause by seeking removal of said

architectural bathers

by consistently

complaining

to Sams Club cashiers and managers

orally and in writing and has not given up despite

being repeatedly

ignored Furthermore

Plaintiff has retained competent

counsel

with previous experience in class action

litigation background

in civil rights litigation as well consumer protection

litigation and

extensive

trial experience

including

recent jury trial verdict

where she successfully

compelled

fast-food

giant to modify its policy

to reflect the requirements

of the

Americans

with Disabilities Act of 1990

Superiority

class action is superior

to other available

means for the fair and efficient

adjudication

of this controversy

since individual

joinder

of all members

of the class is

impracticable

Class action treatment

will permit

large number of similarly situated

persons

to prosecute

their common claims in single forum simultaneously

efficiently

Class Action Complaint

for Violation

of The Unruh Civil Rights Act

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page18 of 42

and without

the unnecessary

duplication

of effort and expense that numerous individual

actions tuld engender

Furthermore

the expense and burden of individual

litigation

would make it difficult or impossible

for individual

members

of the class to redress the

wrongs done to them while an important

public

interest will be served

by addressing

the

matter as

class action

The cost to the court system of adjudication

of such

individualized

litigation

would be substantial

Individualized

litigation

would also present

the potential

for inconsistent

or contradictory

judgments

17

There are no obstacles

to effective and efficient management

of this action that would preclude

its maintenance

as class action

10

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR VIOLATION OF THE UNRUH CiVIL RIGHTS ACT

11

CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE SECTiON 51

12 18

13

19

Plaintiff

incorporates

herein by reference

the foregoing

facts as if fully set forth herein

At all times mentioned

herein GEORGE PARTIDA has been disabled

insofar as he could not

14

stand or walk Therefore he has been confined to his power wheelchair

and dependent

thereon

15
16 20

for mobility

At all times mentioned

herein WAL-MART STORES INC has been doing business

as Sams

17

Club retail store located

at 6201 Skypark

Drive Torrance

California 90505 and has been the

18
19 21
20
21 22

lessee of the building

at said address

During the preceding

two years while patronizing

said place of public accommodation

GEORGE PARTIDA experienced

difficulty GEORGE PARTIDA

wanted but was unable to

independently

use the available

Card Readers at said facilitys checkout

terminals

because they

were mounted too high for him view and select options arid enter information from his seated

23

position

24

Class Action

Complaint

for Violation

of The Unruh Civil Rights Act

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page19 of 42

22

Removing said architectural barriers would have been readily achievable easily accomplishable

and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense for WAL-MART

STORES INC

23

The foregoing

constitutes

violation of Civil Code section 51 28 C.F.R

36.303 and 42 U.S.C

12182

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR VIOLATION OF THE UNRUH CIVIL RIGHTS ACT CALIFORNIA CIVIL CORE SECTION 51

24 25

Plaintiff incorporates

herein by reference

the foregoing

facts as if fully set forth herein

At all times mentioned

herein GEORGE PARTIDA

has been disabled

insofar as he could not

stand or walk Therefore he has been confined to his power wheelchair

and dependent

thereon

TO
11 26
12 13
14 27
15 16 17

for mobility

At all times mentioned

herein WAL-MART STORES INC has been doing business

as

Walmart

store located

at 19503 Normandie Avenue Torance

California 90501 and has been

the lessee of the building

at said address

During the preceding

two years while patronizing

said place of public accommodation

GEORGE PARTIIDA experienced

difficulty GEORGE PARTIDA wanted but was unable to

independently

use the available

Card Readers at said facilitys checkout

terminals

because they

were mounted too high for him to view and select options and enter infonnation from his seated

18
19 28

20

21

29

22

position

Removing said architectural bathers

would have been readily achievable easily accomplishable

and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense for WAL-MART

STORES INC

The foregoing

constitutes

violation of Civil Code section 51 28 C.F.R

36.303 and 42 U.S.C

12182

23

24

Class Action

Complaint

for Violation

of The Unruh Civil Rights

Act

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page20 of 42

PRAYER

WHEREFORE

Plaintiff prays

That the Court determine this action may be maintained as

class action

That Plaintiff and members of the Plaintiff class recover damages pursuant to Civil Code

section 52 for each and every offense in violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act

permanent

injunctive relief and attorneys fees

That Plaintiff and the other members of the Plaintiff Class be granted

such further relief

as the nature of the case may require or as is just and proper

Dated 8/8/2012
10

RespectfWly

Submitted

\4EHRBAN LAW CORPORATION A.P.C

12

________

uli

ehrban

13

ttomey for Plaintiff

George Partida

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

15

Plaintiff on his own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly

situated

hereby demands

16

byjurv 17
Dated 8/8/2012
18

Respecthslly

Submitted

MEHRBAN LAW CORPORATION A.P.C

19

trial

20

By

_________________________

21

ulie

ban

ey for Plaintiff

22

George Partida

23

24

Class Action Complaint

for Violation

of The Unruh Civil Rights Act

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page21 of 42

liThE
partida

Wal-Mart

Stores

Inc

DECLARATION

CASE NUMBER BC488176
OF MAILING

7TRUCTIONS

Only

person who is age 18 years or older and not

documenl party to this action

can serve

copies by mail Code Civ Proc

3a 101

An Unsigned

Copy of this Declaration

of Mailing must be attached

to

and mailed with the copies

After the copies are deposited

in the mail

sign

this form

LFi this

attached

as the last

form can be

felony

page of the punishable

originals

for filing

by imprisonment

the person who mailed Code Civ Proc in state prison Pen

them must fill out and
1013b WARNING

Code

118

126

am employed
time of mailing

in or was

resident

of the county

at least 18 years of age

in which or older

this mailing occurred

and not

party to this action At the

am readily

familiar

with the practice

at the residence

or business

ng of correspondence

for mailing with the United

with said Postal Service

wtth the postage

prepaid

States Postal
the same day

address shown below

Service

which causes it

it is mailed

or placed

for

for collection

and process

to be sealed

and deposited

collection

and processing

My

residence

business

address

and telephone

number are as follows

rADDRE5S 15233

Ventura

Blvd

Suite 1000

TELEP HONE NUMBER

310

571 0104

CiTY STATE AND ZiP CODE
Sherman Oaks CA 91403

2251

served the below documents

on behalf of Plaintiff

George Partida

by

personally sealing and mailing with postage

prepaid

placing for collection

and mailing

business

practices true copies to the addressed

as shown on the date and at the place shown in

sealed

or to be sealed

in the ordinary course

of business

and addressed

as follows

name of party

following

ordinary

envelopes

The California

Commission on

21 Capitol Mall Room 260

Sacramento

CA 95814

Disability

Access

DATE MAILED Lbo/23l2

PLACE OF MAPuNG
Sherman Gaks

City and state
California

Exact titles of documents served Verified Complaint

for Damages and Permanent

Injunctive

Relief

declare DATED 10/23/12

under

penalty

of perjuy under the laws of the State of California

TYPE OR PRINT NAME or PERSON WHO DID MAJUNG

Sic

Gwen Aparente

oin is R5ON

nd
MAI

otiect

LACIV 143 Rev 09/08

LASC Approved

03-04

DECLARATION OF MAILING

Code Civ Proc

1013

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page22 of 42

Your case

Is assigned

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES NOTICE OF CASE ASSIGNMENT UNLIMED CIVIL CASE NON-CLASS ACTION

Case Number________________________________

for all purposes

FORM IS TO BE SERVEWWITR

TUE SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT

to the judicial

officer

Indicated

3.3c below Local Rule

There Is additional information

48 11.7

on the reverse

at

of this form

ASSIGNED JUDGE

DEPT

ROOM

ASSIGNED JUDGE

DEPT

ROOM

Hon Carolyn

Kulil

534

Hon Debre Katz Weintraub

47

507

Hon.MlchaelP.Linfield

10

631

Hon Elizabeth

Allen White

48

506

Hon BarbaraA Meiers

12

636

Hot Deirdre

Hill

509

Hon.TenyA.Green

14

300

Hon John

Segal

50

508

Hot Richard Fnün

15

307

Hon Abraham Khan

511

Hon RitaMiller

16

306

Hot Susan

Bryant-Deason

52

510

Hon.RichardRico

17

309

Hon Steven

Kleifield

53

513

Hot Kevin

Brazile

20

310

Hon EtnestvL Hiroshige

54

512

HotRobatLHess

24

314

Hon.MalcolmH.Mackey

55

515

Hon.MaryAnnMurphy

Hon.JarnesR.Dunn

Hot Yvette

Palazuelos

25

317

Hon Michael

Johnson

26

316

Hon.RalphW.Dau

28

318

Hon.RolfM.Treu

56

514

57

517

58

516

Hot Barbara Scheper

Hot Alan

Rxsenfield

30

400

Hon David

Mlnning

31

407

Hon Michael

Stern

61

632

62

600

Hon Mary

Stnbel

32

406

Hon Mark Mooney

68

617

Hon Charles

Palmer

33

409

Hon Ramona See

69

621

Hot Amy

Hogue

Hon Daniel Buckley

34

408

Hon Soussan

Bruguera

35

411

Hon Ruth Ann Kwan

71

729

72

73

Hot GregoryAlarcon Hon Joanne ODonnell

Hot Maureen Duflj.Lewis

Hot Michelle

It Rosenblalt

36

410

Hon Teresa Sanchez-Gordon

37

413

Hun William

Pahcy

38

412

Hon Emilie

Elias

40

414

Hon Elihu

Berle

74

735

78

730

324

CCW

323

CCW

Hon.RonaldM.Sobzgran

417

other

Hon HollyE Kendig Hon Mel Red Recana

42

416

45

529

Hon Fredrick

Sheller

46

601

Given to the Plaintiff/Cross-Complainant/Attoney

of Record on__________

101114

By

CLARKE Executive

Officer/Clerk

Deputy Clerk

LACIVCCH 190 Rev 01/12

LASC Approved

05-06

For Optional Use

NOTICE OF CASE ASSIGNMENT UNLIMITED CML CASE

Page of

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page23 of 42

UN .i.h

LtZJ

jefjOr Coer of C.Jiromb

County of Los Annales

NOTICE SENT TO

Mehrban Law Corporation

15233 Ventura Boulevard

Suite 1000

Sherman Oaks

CA 91403

FILE
STAMjj6

212012

4_kz-cc_ fli\ arke EXCCLIIVO

CceJC6r Ds-r

fl

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

GEORGE PARTIDA wa-MART STORES

VS INC

Plaintiffs Defendants

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CASE NUMBER
3C4 88176
NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

TO THE PLAINTIFFS/ATTORNEYS

FOR PLAINTIFFS OF RECORD

You are attorneys

ordered to serve

of record

about

this notice of hearing

on all

the matters to be discussed

parties/attorneys no later than

of record

forthwith

and meet and

30 days before the Case Management

confer

with all

Conference

partiesl

Your Case Management

at 111 North

Hill Street

Conference Los Angeles

has been Califomia

scheduled 90012

for November

26 2012 at 830 am in Dept 49

NOTICE TO DEFENDANT

THE SETTING OF THE CASE MANAGEMENT

DEFENDANT

FROM FILING

RESPONSIVE

CONFERENCE

DOES NOT EXEMPT THE

PLEADING AS REQUIRED BY LAW

Pursuant CM- 110

to California must be flied

Rules of Court rules at least IS calendar

3.720-3.730

completed

Case Management

Statement

days pnor to the Case Management

Conference

The

may case

be filed and be

jointly

by all partIes/attorneys

fully prepared

to participate

of record effectively

or individually

by each party/attorney

in the Case Management

Conference

of record

Judicial

Council

Case Management

form Statement

You must be familiar with the

At the Case Management

Conference

the Court may make pretrial

orders Including

the following

but not limited to an order

establishing

discovery

schedule

an order referring

the case to Alternative

Dispute Resolution

ADR an order

reclassifying

the

case an order Reduction Act

setting subsequent
Gov Code section

conference and
68600 et seq

the trial date

or other orders

to achieve

the goals of the Trial Court Delay

Notice

is hereby given that if you do not file the Case Management

Statement

or appear and effectively

participate

at the Case

Management

Conference

the Court may impose

sanctions

pursuant to LASC Local Rule 7.13 Code of Civil Procedeure

sections

177

575.2 583.150

583.360 and 583.410

Government

Code Section

68608

and California

Rules of Court 2.2 et seq
DEIRORE FULL

Date August 21 2012

______________________________________

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Judicial Officer

the below named Executive

and that on this date

served

Officer/Clerk

of the above-entitled

the Notice of Case Management

court do Conference

hereby upon

certify

that

am not

each party or counsel

party to the cause named above

herein

-rscdepositing

in the United

separate sealed envelope

Slates to each

mail at the courthouse

in Los Angeles

address as shown above

with postage

California

one copy

thereon fully prepaid

of the onginal

flied hereIn

in

by personally

giving

Date August 21 2012

the party

notice

upon

filing the complaint

John

Clarke

Executive

Officer/Clerk

LACIV 132 Rev 09/07

-Asc Approved

10-03

by ______________________________

Deputy Clerk

j.FsW4Brule 3.720-3.730
LASC Local Rui Chapte Seven

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page24 of 42

ATTORNEY

OR PARTY wTNOUT ATTORNEY

Name

Stat Bar number

it attorney

am acensai

FOR cOLmT USE ONLY

TELEPHONE

MAIL ADDRESS

iopacs

ATTORNEY

FOR Nan

SUPERIOR

COURT OF CALIFORNIA

STREET AODRES5

MAILING

ADDRESS

CiTY ANOZIP SRACN

CODE NAME

PLA1NTIFF DEFENDANT

COUNTY OF

FM NO OpbonaQ

NOTiCE OF STAY OF PROCEEDINGS AND EARLY EVALUATION CONFERENCE

CONSTRUCTION-RELATED

ACCESSIBILITY

CLAIM

CASE NUMBER

Stay of Proceeding

For

penod

of 90 days from the date of the filing of this

taking any further action relating to the construction-related

court notice

unless

otherwise

accessibility

claim or claims

ordered in this

by the court case

the parties

are stayed

from

This stay does not apply

which

is still in place

to any construction-related

accessibility

claim

in which the plaintiff

has obtained

temporary

Injunctive

relief

Notice of Early Evaluation

Conference

This action includes

construction-related

accessibility

claim under Civil Code Section

55.52a1 or other provision

of law

defendant

has requested

an early evaluation

conference and

stay of proceedings

under Civil Code Section

55 54

The early evaluation Date

conference

is scheduled time

as follows

Dept

Room

The conference

will be held at

the ccjrt address shown

above or

at

The plaintiff

and defendant

shall

attend

with any

partys

disability

requires

the partys participation

appearance

of an aulhonzed

representative

other by

person telephone

needed

for settlement

of the case

appearance

or other alternate

unless means

with court approval

or through

the personal

The defendant

that requested

the conference

CASp the

report for the site that is the subject

date set for the early evaluation
Code Section 55.54d4

conference

and stay of proceedings of the construction-related

must file with accessibility

the court and serve

on all parties

copy of

claim

at least fifteen

15 days before

the

The CASp report is confidential

and only available

as set forth below and in Civil

The CASp report shall be marked

CONFIDENTIAL

and may be disclosed

attorneys

those individuals

employed

or retained

by the attomeys

to assist

others

involved

in the evaluation

and settlement

of the case

only to the court

the parties to the action

in the litigation

and insurance

representatives

the

parties or

The plaintiff conference

shall file with the court and serve

on all parties at least

statement

of to the extent known all of the following

fifteen

15 days before

the date set for the early evaluation

An itemized

list of specific

issues

on

violations

in the plaintiffs

complaint

The amount of damages

claimed

the

subject

premises

The amount of attorneys

fees and costs incurred to date

Any demand for settlement

of the case in its entirety

that are the basis of the claimed construction-related

if any that are being claimed

and

accessibility

NOTICE

OF STAY OF PROCEEDINGS

Construction-related

Accessibility

AND EARLY
Claim

EVALUATION CONFERENCE

Provisional

Form

Page

Ciuti

Code

5554

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page25 of 42

copy of this Notice and Order and the Defendants

delivering

it or mailing

it to the address

listed on the

Stay of Proceeding

and Early Evaluation

Conference

Application complaint

shall be served on the same date

on the plaintiff that the court

or plaintiffs issues the

attorney

Notice

and

by hand Order of

Dale

Clerk by __________________________

Deputy

More

information plaintiff

about this Notice

and Order

and defendants

in complying

and the defendants

with this Notice

and

application

and

Order may be

instructions

obtained

at

wwwcoutfinfo.ca.gov/seffhelp

to assist

Request for Accommodation

Assistive

listening

systems

available

if you ask at least

www.eournntb

ca govifoirns

fern MC-410 Civil Code

computer-assisted

real-time

captioning

or sign language

interpreler

services

days before

the date on which

for Request for Acoommodations

you are to appear by Persons with

Contact Disabilitier

the clerks

office

and Order

Section

54.8

are or go 10

Required from Defendant

Filing

Proof of Service

Application

for Stay

and Early Evaluation

Conference

served Section

copy of the defendants 55.54 and the court Notice

Application and Order

For Slay and Early Evaluation

Conference

of Stay of Proceedings

and Early Evaluation

Pursuant To Civil Code

Conference

check one

On the Plaintiffs

attorney

On the Plaintiff

who is not represented

by an attorney

By hand delivenng

it or mailing

it to the address

of Proceedings

and Early

Evaluation

Conference

listed on the complaint

on the day the Court issued

this Notice

and Order of Stay

declare

under penalty

of perjury of the laws of the State of Califomia

that the foreguing

is true and correct

Dated

Type or Print Name

Signature

Address of named person

NOTICE

OF STAY OF PROCEEDINGS

Construction-related

Accessibility

_______
AND EARLY
Claim

EVALUATION CONFERENCE

Provisional

Form

PigZof2

Civii

Ccde 55.54

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page26 of 42

ATTORNEY

OR PART

WITHOUT

ATTORNEY

Name

State

Bar number

ti attorney

and addntss

FOR COURT USE ONLY

TELEPHONE

EMAii ADDRESS

Ooaai

ATTORNEY

FOR Name

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

STREET ADDRESS

ARILING

ADDRESS

CITY AND ZIP CCXE

BRANCH

NAME

PLAINTIFF DEFENDANT

COUNTY OF

FAX NO OpOoraO

DEFENDANTS APPLICATiON FOR STAY AND EARLY EVALUATION

CONFERENCE PURSUANT TO CIVIL CODE SECTION 5t54

CONSTRUCTION-RELATED

ACCESSIBILITY

CLAIM

CASE NUMBER

Information

about

this application

and the filing

instructions

may be obtained

at www courunfo ca.gov/seljhelp

Defendant evaluation

name ___________________________________________________

conference

pursuant

to Civil Code Section

55.54

requests

stay of proceedings

and early

The complaint

in this case alleges

construction-related

accessibility

claim as defined

under Civil Code Section

55.52a1

The Claim concems

site that check the box If lB statement

is true

______ Has determination

been inspected pending and

by

Certified Access

CASp Specialist

and determined

to be

if CASp inspected

there have been no modifications

completed

CASp inspected or commenced

or CASp
since the

of inspection knowledge

that may and

impact

compliance

with construction-related

accessibility

standards

to the best of defendants

______

An inspection

report by

Certified Access

Specialist

CASp relating to the site has been issued

date

Both

and

must be met for the court to order

Stay and Early Evaluation

Conference

am requesting

the court to

Stay the proceedings

relating to the construction-related

accessibility

claim

Schedule an Early Evaluation

Conference

Order Defendant

to

file

confidential

of the report on the Plaintiff

at least

copy
fifteen

kept confidential

as set forth

in Civil Code

of the Certified Access

Specialist

15 days before

the date of the

Section 55.54d4

CASp report
Early Evaluation

with the court and serve

Conference

which shall

Order Plaintiff

statement

on

to file the statement

required

the Defendant

at least fifteen

by Civil Code Section

55.54d6A-D

with the court and

15 days before

the date of the Early Evaluation

Conference

serve

copy

copy be
of the

declare

under penalty

of pequry under the laws of the State of California

that the foregoing

is true and correct

Date

TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF DECLARANT

SIGNATURE OF DECLARANT

TITLE OF DECLARANT

DEFENDANTS

APPLICATION FOR STAY OF PROCEEDINGS

Construction-related

Accessibility

Claim

AND EARLY EVALUATION

Provisional

Form

CONFERENCE
CivtiCode5554

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page27 of 42

IMPORTANT ADVISORY INFORMATION FOR BUILDING OWNERS AND TENANTS

STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT YOU GET THIS IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR BUILDING OWNERS AND TENANTS

ADVISORY

This information is available

in English Spanish Chinese Vietnamese

Judicial

Council of California Persons with visual impairments

can get

form through the Judicial

Council

Internet Web site at www.courts.ca.gov

and Korean through

assistance

in viewing

the this

California complaint

law requires you received

that you receive

this information because the

with this document claims that your building

demand

letter or court

or property does not

comply with one or more existing construction-related

accessibility

laws or regulations

protecting

the civil rights of persons

with disabilities

to access public places

YOU HAVE IMPORTANT LEGAL OBLIGATIONS Compliance with disability access laws is

serious

and significant

responsibility

that applies

to all California

building owners and tenants

with buildings open for business

to the public You may obtain information about your legal

obligations

and how to comply with disability

access laws through the Division of the State

Architect at www.dgs.ca.gov

Information is also available

from the California

Commission

on

Disability

Access at www.ccda.ca

gov/guide.htm

YOU HAVE IMPORTANT LEGAL RIGHTS The allegations

made in the accompanying

demand

letter or court complaint

do not

until

court finds you liable Moreover

COMPLAINT AND THIS ADVISORY

mean that you are required to pay any money unless
RECEIPT OF DEMAND LETTER OR COURT
DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN YOU WILL

and
BE

FOUND LIABLE FOR ANYTHING You will have the right if you are later sued to fully

present

your explanation

why you believe

you have not in fact violated

disability

access laws or

have corrected the violation or violations

giving rise to the claim

You have the right to seek assistance

or advice about this demand

letter or court complaint

fronì

any person of your

provider

Your best

choice If you have insurance you interest may be served by seeking

may also wish to contact your
legal advice or representation

insurance from an

attorney but you may also represent

yourself and

interests if you are served with

court complaint

you should immediately

notit3 your attorney

file the necessary If you have hired

court papers to protect

an attorncy

to represent

your
you

If court complaint

complaint conditions

advising

has been served on you you will get you of special options and procedures

separate available

advisory notice with the to you under certain

ADDITIONAL

THINGS

KNOW YOU SHOULD

If the document accompanying

this notice

is

demand

letter

from

lawyer and not formal court complaint

the lawyer is generally required

by law to also provide

copy of it to the State Bar of California

until January

12016 in order

that the State Bar may determine whether the demand

letter complies

with legal requirements

INCLUDING THAT THE DEMAND LETTER MAY NOT MAKE REQUEST OR

DEMAND FOR MONEY OR AN OFFER OR AGREEMENT TO ACCEPT MONEY Any

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page28 of 42

demand letter document

or court

complaint

must list the lawyers

State Bar license number on the

You are encouraged

but are not required

to provide the State Bar with

copy of the demand

letter so the State Bar is aware that you received this demand

letter and may determine whether it

is in compliance

with specified

legal requirements

copy of the letter can be sent to the State

Bar by facsimile

transmission to 1-415-538-2171

or by mail to the State Bar of California

180

Howard Street San Francisco

CA 94105 Attention Professional

Competence

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page29 of 42

ADVISORY NOTICE TO DEFENDANT

YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO ASK FOR COURT STAY AN ORDER TEMPORARILY

STOPPING ANY LAWSUIT AND EARLY EVALUATION CONFERENCE

IN THIS

LAWSUIT AND MAY BE ASSESSED REDUCED STATUTORY DAMAGES IF YOU

MEET CERTAIN CONDITIONS

If the construction-related

accessibility

Specialist

CASp inspection report

claim pertains

to

site that has

Certified Access

for that site or to site where new construction or

improvement

was approved

after January

2008 by the local building permit and inspection

process

you may make an immediate

request

for

court stay and early evaluation

conference

in

the construction-related

accessibility

claim by filing the attached application

form with the court

You may be entitled to the court

stay and early evaluation

conference

regarding the accessibility

claim only if ALL of the statements

in the application

form applicable to you are true

FURTHER
construction

if you are

defendant described

above

after January

2008 and to the best

with

CASp inspection report

of your knowledge

there have

or with new
been no

modifications

or alterations

department

approval

of the

completed

or commenced

since

new construction or improvement

CASp the

report

or building

that impacted

compliance

with

construction-related
minimum statutory

accessibility

standards with respect

damages may be reduced to $1000

to the plaintiffs for each offense

claim unless

your liability the violation

for
was

intentional

and if all construction-related

accessibility

violations

giving rise to the claim are

corrected within 60 days of being served with this complaint

IN ADDITION

if your business

is

small business

that over the previous three years or the

existence of the business if less than three years employs 25 or fewer employees on average

over court
may

that time period and meets specified

gross receipts

criteria you may also be entitled

stay and early evaluation

conference and your minimum statutory damages

for each

be reduced

to $2000 for each offense

unless the violation

was intentional

and if all

to the claim the

alleged

construction-related

accessibility

violations

are corrected

within 30 days of being served

with the complaint

If you plan to correct

the violations

giving rise to the claim you should take pictures

and

measurements

or similar action to document the condition of the physical

barrier asserted

to be

the basis for violation

before undertaking

any corrective

action in case

court needs to see the

condition of barrier before it was corrected

The court
application

will schedule form

the conference

to be held within 70 days after you file the attached

you are not

defendant with

CASp inspection

report

Council you may use the attached lorm if you modify the

declaration

stating any one of the following

until form

form is adopted

by the Judicial

and supplement

it with your

Until January
2008 and before

2018 that the sites new construction

January

2016 was approved

pursuant

or improvement

on or after January

to the local building permit and

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page30 of 42

inspection

process

that to the best of your knowledge

there have been no modifications

or

alterations

completed

or commenced

since the building department

approval

that impacted

compliance

with construction-related

accessibility

standards with respect

to the plaintiffs

claim

and that alIviolations

giving rise to the claim have been corrected

or will be corrected

within 60

days of the complaint being served

That the sites new construction or improvement

passed inspection

by

local building

department

inspector

who is certified access specialist

that to the best of your knowledge

there have been no modifications

or alterations

completed

or commenced

since that inspection

approval

that impacted

compliance

with construction-related

accessibility

standards with respect

to the plaintiffs

claim and that all violations

giving rise to the claim have been corrected

or will

he corrected

within 60 days of the complaint being served

That your business

is

small business

with 25 or fewer employees and meets the gross

receipts

criteria

set out in Section 55.56 of the Civil Code and that all violations

giving rise to

the claim have been corrected

or will be corrected within 30 days of being served with the

complaint

lie court will also issue an immediate

stay of the proceedings

unless

the plaintiff has obtained

temporary

restraining

order in the construction-related

accessibility

claim You may obtain

copy early

of the application

form filing instructions

evaluation

conference

through the Judicial

and additional

information

Web Council Internet

site

about
at

the stay and

www.courts.ca.gov/selflielp-start.htm

You may tile the application

after you are served with

summons and complaint

but no later

than your first court pleading or appearance

in this case which is due within 30 days after you

receive

the summons

and complaint

If you do not file the application

you will still need to file

your reply to the lawsuit

within 30 days after you receive

the summons and complaint to contest

it You may obtain more information about how to represent

yourself and how to file

reply

without hiring an attorney

at www.courts.ca.gov/selflielp-start.htm

You may tile the application

without the assistance

of an attorney but it may he in your best

interest to immediately

seek the assistance

of an attorney

experienced

in disability

access laws

when you receive

summons and complaint

You may make an offer to settle the case and it

may be in your interest to put that offer in writing so that it may be considered

under Section

55 of the Civil Code

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page31 of 42
EXHIBIT

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page32 of 42

Robert

Naeve State Bar No 106095

rnaevedijonesday.com

Mark

Earnest

State Bar No 253490

meamesttjonesday.com
JONES DAY

3161 Michelson

Drive

.4

Suite 800

Irvine CA 92612.4408

949 851-3939

Facsimile

949 553-7539

Attorneys for Defendant
WAL-MART STORES

NC

43V
2C
---
1WvN iiLcXJDFJ4

SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CENTRAL JUDICIAL DISTRICT

10

11

GEORGE PARTIDA on behalf of himself

sad all others similarly

situated

12

Plaintiff

14
\VAL-MART STORES INC.
15 Defendant

ase No l3C488I76

Assigned

to Hon Deirdre

Hill Dept 49

ANSWER OF DEFENDANT \I4RT STORES INC

WAL

Complaint Filed

August 13 2012

17

IS

Defendant WaI-Mart

WaI-Marf Stores Inc

for itself alone hereby answers the

19

unverified

Complaint for Damages and Pennanent

Injunctive Relief for Violation

of Unruh Civil

no

Rights Act Complaint tiled by plaintiff George Partida Plaintiff as follows

GENERAL DENIAL

Pursuant

to the provisions

ot California Code of Civil Procedure section 431.30d Wal

dart hereby generally

denies

each and every allegation

statement matter and purported cause of

iction contained in Plaintiffs Complaint and without

limiting the generality

of the foregoing

25

denies

that

class action should be certified

denies

that Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive

reliet

and flirt her denies

that Plaintiff has been damaged

in the manner or sums alleged or in any way at

27

all by reason of any acts or omission

of Wal-N fart

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page33 of 42

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

Without conceding

that it bears the burden of proof or persuasion

Wal-Mart asserts the

following separate

and affirmative

defenses

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Failure To State

Cause of Action

The Complaint

and each cause of action

alleged therein

fail to state

against Wal-Mart upon which relief can be granted
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

cause of action

Failure To State

Cause of Action For Injunctive

Relief

10

The Complaint

fails to state

cause of action upon which injunctive

relief can be granted

11

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

12

Statutes Of Limitation

13

The Complaint

and each cause of action alleged

therein

are barred to the extent they

14

purport to seek recovery for alleged acts or omissions

occurring outside any applicable

limitations

15

period

16

17

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
No Authority

18

The Complaint

and each cause of action alleged

therein

are barred to the extent

Plaintiff

19

demands

that Wal-Mart act in manner not required by applicable

law

20

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

21

Not Readily Achievable

22

The Complaint

and each cause of action alleged

therein are barred to the extent Plaintiff

23

demands

that Wal-Mart remove alleged barriers where such removal

is not readily

achievable

24

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

25

Undue Burden

26

The Complaint

and each cause of action alleged

therein are barred to the extent Plaintiff

27

demands

that Wal-Mart provide auxiliary

aids or services

which would result in an undue burden

28

on Wal-Mart

ANSWER

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page34 of 42

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Fundamental

Alterations

The Complaint and each cause of action alleged therein are barred to the extent Plaintiff

demands that Wal-Mart provide auxiliary

aids or services

and modify its policies

and procedures

where such provision and modification would fundamentally

alter the nature of Wal-Marts

goods services

or facilities

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Flexibility To Choose Alternative Methods

The Complaint and each cause of action alleged therein

are barred to the extent

Plaintiff

10

demands that Wal-Mart act in manner not required because Wal-Mart has the flexibility to

11

choose what alternative

methods it may provide

12

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

13

Good Faith Reliance

14

The Complaint

and each cause of action alleged therein

fail because Wal-Mart relied in

15

good faith upon reasonable

interpretations

of California

law by local building authorities

and

16

issuance

of appropriate

building permits certifying

that Wal-Mart complied

with the Califomia

17

Building Code

18

TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

19

Not Authorized By IJnruh Act

20

Plaintiffs are barred from obtaining

relief under California

Civil Code section

51 et seq

21

because nothing contained in that section requires

Wal-Mart to act in the manner Plaintiff

22

requests

23

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

24

Failure To Mitigate Damages

25

Plaintiff had

duty to mitigate

his damages

and to the extent he failed to do so any

26

damages awarded to Plaintiff should be reduced accordingly

27

28

ANSWER

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page35 of 42

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Construction

Tolerances

The Complaint

and each cause of action alleged therein

are barred to the extent

the

elements

identified

in the Complaint substantially

comply with applicable law and are within

construction

tolerances

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Equivalent

Facilitation

The Complaint

and each cause of action alleged therein

are barred to the extent

any

departure from technical

requirements

in the elements

identified

in the Complaint is permitted

10

because the departures provide substantially

equivalent

or greater access to and usability

of the

11

particular element

12

WAL-MARTS PRAYER FOR RELIEF

13

Wal-Mart does not presently

know all the facts and circumstances

respecting Plaintiffs

14

causes of action Wal-Mart reserves

the right to amend this Answer should it later discover facts

15

demonstrating

the existence of additional

affirmative

defenses

16

WHEREFORE

Wal-Mart hereby prays for the following relief

17

That Plaintiff takes nothing by reason of the Complaint

18

That judgment be rendered in favor of Wal-Mart

19

That

class action

not be certified

20

That Wal-Mart be awarded its attorneys

fees and costs of suit incurred in this

21

action and

22

For such other and further relief

Court

a74he

23

Dated November 20 2012

Jones Day

ms just and proper

24
By____________

Robert

Naeve

\dtorneys

for Defendant

WA5-MART STORES

27

28
-4
ANSWER

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page36 of 42

PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL

am

citizen of the United States and employed

in Orange County California

am over

the age of eighteen years and not

party to the within-entitled

My action

business address is

3161 Michelson

Drive Suite 800 Irvine California

92612.4408

1am readily

familiar with this

firms practice

for collection

and processing of correspondence

for mailing with the United States

Postal Service

On November

20 2012 placed with this firm at the above address for deposit

with the United States Postal Service

true and correct copy of the within documents

ANSWER OF DEFENDANT WAL-MART STORES INC

in sealed envelope

postage fully paid addressed

as follows

10

Julie Mehrban Esq

Mehrban Law Corporation

APC

Il

15233 Ventura Blvd. Suite 1000

12

Sherman Oaks CA 91403-2251

310 Telephone

694-8331

13

Fax 310 822-5809

Juliea .JulieMehrhancotn 14

lttorneysJor

Plaintiff George Partida

15

Following

ordinary business practices

the envelope

was sealed and placed for collection

16

and mailing on this date and would in the ordinary course of business

be deposited

with the

17

United States Postal Service on this date
18

declare under penalty of peij ury under the laws of the State of California

that the above

19

is true and correct 20

Executed on November

20 2012 at Irvine California

Maria

Castellanos

24

25

26

27

28

Proof of Service

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page37 of 42
EXHIBIT

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page38 of 42

Robert

Naeve State Bar No 106095

maeve@jonesday.com

Mark

No Earnest State Bar

253490

rnearnestdj

onesday

JONES DAY

corn

3161 Michelson Drive

Suite 800
Irvine CA
Telephone Facsimile

926 12.4408
949 851-3939 949 553-7539

Attorneys

for Defendant

WAL-MART STORES NC

SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CENTRAL JUDICIAL DISTRICT

10

11

GEORGE PARTIDA on behalf of himself

and all others similarly

situated

Plaintiff 13

13
WALMART STORES INC.
IS
Defendant
16

17 ________________________________________
IS

Case No 3C488176

Assigned to Hon Deirdre Hill Dept 49
NOTICE TO STATE COURT AND ADVERSE PARTY OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION FROM STATE COURT TO THE UNITED STATES lISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Complaint Filed

August 13 2012

19

-1

Notice \dverse

to State Court and
Pam of Removal

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page39 of 42

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT on November 21 2012 defendant Wal-Mart Stores Inc

tiled its Notice of Removal of Civil Action from State Court Pursuant to 28 U.S.C

1332

1441 and 1446 Notice of Removal

to remove this action to the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

In compliance with 28 U.S.C

1446d copy of the

Notice of Removal

is attached as Exhibit

to this Notice and is served and filed herewith

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE THAT pursuant to 28 U.S.C 1446d the tiling

and service of this Notice removes this action and stays all proceedings

in connection

the Los Angeles County Superior
Dated November 21 2012

is Court unless and until

action is remanded

Da Jones

therewith in

10

11

By _____________________________

Robert pt Naeve

.\ttorneys for Defendant
WAL-MART STORES INC

Ii

14

15

17 18 19
20
21

23 24 25 26 27 28

Notice \dverse

to State Court and Party of Removal

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page40 of 42

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page41 of 42

Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document1 Filed11/21/12 Page42 of 42

 
 Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document2 Filed11/21/12 Page1 of 2

Robert A. Naeve (State Bar No. 106095)

rnaevera2jonesday.com

2 Mark Ir'Earnest -(State Bar No. 253490)

mearnestra2jonesday.com

3 JONES DAY

3161 Michelson Drive

4 Suite 800

Irvine, CA 92612.4408 5 Telephone: (949) 851-3939
Facsimile: (949) 553-7539
6
Attorneys for Defendant
7 WAL-MART STORES, INC.

"-<'

= (")(')- .....,
....., rnf1'1
% YJ

\ '
!I

V'-l<;"~ :;;;~...v~o

:z:
c-:<:>
N

- r'l
r

-H

,."

8

" ~,.. ::0
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ~g~ :x

0

9

~~ ~

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALlFOR1'A

en
&"

10

II GEORGE PARTIDA, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
12 situated,

13

Plaintiff,

14

v.

Case No. cv 12 - 10015 JAK (VBKx)
CERTIFICATION AS TO INTERESTED PARTIES AND FRCP 7.1 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE

15 WAL-MART STORES, INC.,

16

Defendant.

17

[L.R. 7.1-1 , Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1]

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Certification As To Interested Parties

-------"--,
Case3:13-cv-00305-CRB Document2 Filed11/21/12 Page2 of 2

Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. ("Wal-Mart") submits the following

2 certification as to interested parties and corporate disclosure pursuant to Local Civil

-'"' Rule 7.1-1 and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1. The undersigned, counsel of 4 record for Wal-Mart, certifies that the following listed party may have a pecuniary

5 interest in the outcome of this case. These representations are made to enable the

6 Court to evaluate possible disqualification or recusal:

7

Wal-Mart does not have a parent corp~ion and there is no publicly held

8 corporation that owns 100/0 or more of its srock. \

9 Dated: November 21,2012
10 11 12 13 14

JONES\DAY

I

!

/

ky: ~/

\, Robe A. Naeve

\
Attorneys for Defendant WAL-MART STORES, INC.
~

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

23 24 25
26 27 28

- 1-

Certitication As To Interested Parties

 
 Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 1 of 21
EXHIBIT A

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 2 of 21
Non-Class Settlement Agreement and Release
This Non-Class Settlement Agreement and Release (“Agreement,” “Settlement,” or “Settlement Agreement”) is entered into by and between Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (“Wal-Mart”) and (1) the Center for Independent Living, Inc. (“CIL”), (2) Janet Brown, and (3) Lisa Kilgore (together, the “CIL Plaintiffs”). CIL Plaintiffs and Wal-Mart are hereafter referred to as the “Parties.”
Recitals
CIL Plaintiffs filed a complaint against Wal-Mart in United States District Court for the Northern District of California on July 25, 2012 (the “Lawsuit”). The Lawsuit was assigned the civil action number 3:12-cv-03885-LB and was assigned to the Honorable Laurel Beeler. The case was reassigned to the Honorable Charles R. Breyer on October 23, 2012.
CIL Plaintiffs’ Complaint in the Lawsuit alleged that Wal-Mart violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181 et seq., the California Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code §§ 51 et seq., and the California Disabled Persons Act, California Civil Code §§ 54 et seq., by denying CIL Plaintiffs access to Wal-Mart’s point-of-sale (“POS”) terminals. CIL Plaintiffs sought injunctive and monetary relief.
Wal-Mart denies the allegations against it, denies that its POS terminals were or are inaccessible for customers with mobility disabilities who use wheelchairs and scooters, and denies that this matter is suitable for class treatment. This Settlement Agreement shall not constitute any admission of any liability.
After considering the expense and uncertainty associated with litigation, the Parties desire to fully, fairly, and finally settle all claims CIL Plaintiffs have or may have against Wal-Mart for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged. That desire manifests itself by concluding all pending and/or threatened litigation between CIL Plaintiffs and Wal-Mart related to the Lawsuit.
In negotiating and coming to agreement on the terms below, the Parties understand that Wal-Mart is continuously working to improve the experience of its customers and provide improved access to its goods and services through the use of technology, which may develop and progress during the term of this Agreement. In that regard, the parties understand that, pursuant to Section 3.3 of this Agreement, Wal-Mart may develop or utilize alternative methods and new technologies, methods or procedures by which customers may purchase and pay for goods and services, and this Agreement is not meant to restrict the development of such technologies, methods or procedures.
Whereas, the Parties now desire to resolve their differences and disputes between them related to the Lawsuit in consideration of the following terms set forth in this Agreement.
Page 1 of 11

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 3 of 21
Terms
1. Incorporation of Recitals
The Recitals above are incorporated herein by reference.
2. Definitions
The following terms shall have the following meanings with respect to this Agreement. All other terms shall be interpreted according to their plain and ordinary meanings.
“CIL Plaintiffs” refers to the Center for Independent Living, Inc., Janet Brown, and Lisa Kilgore.
“Effective Date” refers to the last date on which this Agreement is fully executed by the Parties.
“Fabrication Date” refers to the date by which it will be possible to fabricate the New POS Device Mounts.
“New POS Device Mount” refers to the agreed-upon POS device mount, examples of which are attached hereto as Exhibit A; provided, however, that the Parties agree, that Wal-Mart may modify from time-to-time the New POS Device Mount pursuant to Sections 3.3 and 3.4 without breaching this Agreement to meet Purchase Card Industry (“PCI”) requirements, all applicable laws, rules, and regulations, internal security protocols, and durability demands.
“Plaintiffs’ Counsel” refers to Disability Rights Advocates (“DRA”), the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (“DREDF”), and the Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center (“CREEC”).
“Subject Facilities” and “Stores” refers to all retail stores owned and/or operated by Wal-Mart in the State of California only, including Wal-Mart Supercenters, Wal-Mart Discount Stores, and Wal-Mart Neighborhood Markets, but excluding Sam’s Club warehouse stores.
3. Design and Timeline for Deployment of New POS Device Mounts
3.1 New POS Device Mount. According to the timeline set forth in Section 3.2 of this Agreement, Wal-Mart shall install or replace a specified number of existing POS device mounts at front-of-the-store check stands1 (excluding self-service, customer service, and courtesy counter check stands) in all Subject Facilities with the New POS Device Mount. Wal-Mart will determine the minimum number of New POS Device Mounts to be installed by referencing Table 227.2 in the July 23, 2004 Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (hereafter the “Minimum Number”) as it relates to such check stands; provided however, that
1 Wal-Mart’s reference to check stands in this Agreement refers to “cash wrap counter,” as that term is used internally at Wal-Mart.
Page 2 of 11

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 4 of 21
Wal-Mart will be required to install or replace at least two (2) and no more than a total of four (4) New POS Device Mounts at the front-of-the-store check stands in any particular store. In its sole discretion, Wal-Mart may choose to replace additional existing POS device mounts with the New POS Device Mount or install the New POS Device Mount at other locations in the Subject Facilities. For those stores that have the New POS Device Mounts installed, Wal-Mart shall ensure that store operations keep at least one of the check stands with the New POS Device Mounts open and staffed so that customers with mobility disabilities have ready access to a check stand with the New POS Device Mount during all times that each such store is open to the public. Subject to Wal-Mart’s further testing of the New POS Device Mount and its determination that the results indicate an acceptable level of durability, Wal-Mart will make best efforts to install the New POS Device Mount at check stands dedicated to tobacco sales, to the extent such a check stand exists in the particular store. In the event store operations or other circumstances result in all check stands with the New POS Device Mounts being closed at the same time, upon request by a mobility impaired customer who uses a wheelchair or scooter, store operations will make all reasonable efforts to open at least one check stand with a New POS Device Mount. Nothing in this Agreement shall impair Wal-Mart’s ability to modify the number of front-of-the-store check stands available to patrons for checkout, and Wal-Mart makes no representations about the number of front-of-the-store check stands in this Agreement.
3.2 Timeline for Deployment of New POS Device Mounts. Wal-Mart shall install the New POS Device Mounts at all Subject Facilities according to the following schedule:
(a) The Parties acknowledge and understand that the New POS Device Mounts will not be ready for installation in stores until approximately six (6) to nine (9) months after the Effective Date. This is because manufacturing the New POS Device Mounts, which do not currently exist other than in their prototype form, first requires Wal-Mart to engage third parties to create tools and machinery to fabricate the New POS Device Mounts. The completion of this process, namely, when it will be possible to fabricate the New POS Device Mounts, will be the “Fabrication Date.”
(b) Wal-Mart shall install the New POS Device Mounts at all Subject Facilities that have one or more POS devices currently greater than 54 inches high no later than six (6) months after the Fabrication Date.
(c) Wal-Mart shall install the New POS Device Mounts at the following stores no later than six (6) months after the Fabrication Date:
(i) 3705 E. South Street, Long Beach, CA 90805 (ii) 7250 Carson Blvd, Long Beach, CA 90808 (iii) 3112 Santa Rita Rd, Pleasanton, CA 94566 (iv) 1400 Hilltop Mall Rd, Richmond, CA 94806 (v) 5200 Van Buren Blvd, Riverside, CA 92503 (vi) 6250 Valley Springs Pkwy, Riverside, CA 92507 (vii) 19503 Normandie Ave, Torrance, CA 90501 (viii) 2203 Loveridge Rd, Pittsburg, CA 94565
Page 3 of 11

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 5 of 21
(d) Wal-Mart shall install the New POS Device Mounts at 50% of all other Subject Facilities no later than one (1) year after the Fabrication Date.
(e) Wal-Mart shall install the New POS Device Mounts at all remaining Subject Facilities no later than two (2) years after the Fabrication Date.
(f) In addition, should any of the Subject Facilities that have not yet had the New POS Device Mounts installed be remodeled or renovated after April 1, 2017 such that the area of alteration includes one or more check stands, Wal-Mart shall install at least the Minimum Number of New POS Device Mounts at such facilities at the time of remodel or alteration.
(g) In addition, any Subject Facilities constructed after April 1, 2017 will include at least the Minimum Number of New POS Device Mounts prior to opening of the store to the public.
3.3 New Technology. The Parties acknowledge and understand that Wal-Mart is continuously working to improve the experience of its customers and provide improved access to its goods and services. The Parties further acknowledge and understand that, as technology develops and progresses, and applicable laws and PCI regulations change, Wal-Mart may develop or utilize alternative methods and new technologies, methods or procedures by which customers may purchase and pay for goods and services at the Subject Facilities, including technology and methods that do not require customers to use a fixed or detachable POS device to pay for goods and services (referred to as “New Technology” in this Agreement). Accordingly, and notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement, Wal-Mart may use New Technology that provides equal or greater access than the New POS Device Mounts to persons who use wheelchairs and scooters to permit customers to pay for goods and services. In the event WalMart develops or uses such New Technology, Wal-Mart will have the right to discontinue further installations of the New POS Device Mount and use New Technology instead of the New POS Device Mount, provided that, to the extent the New Technology is installed at check stands, it will be installed at the Minimum Number of check stands. The use of such New Technology will satisfy and displace its obligations under this Agreement to install or maintain New POS Device Mounts, including the obligations specified in Sections 3 through 7. To the extent WalMart uses such New Technology during the term of this Agreement, it will first notify Plaintiffs’ Counsel of its intention to use such New Technology to satisfy and displace its obligations under Sections 3 through 7. If a dispute arises concerning whether Wal-Mart’s use of New Technology satisfies its obligations under this Agreement, the Parties shall use the dispute resolution mechanism identified in Section 9.
3.4 Undiscovered Defects. The Parties acknowledge and understand that Wal-Mart has attempted to ensure that the New POS Device Mounts are free from all defects. In this regard, Wal-Mart has internally tested the New POS Device Mounts and also has beta tested the New POS Device Mounts in stores to evaluate the real-world impact of use of the devices. As part of its testing, Wal-Mart has not detected any obvious or apparent defects that would make the New POS Device Mounts dangerous or pose a hazard to the public; similarly, Wal-Mart has not detected any obvious or apparent defects that would render the New POS Device Mounts
Page 4 of 11

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 6 of 21
inoperable. However, the Parties acknowledge and agree that, given the unique design of the New POS Device Mounts, and further given that the New POS Device Mounts are mechanical in nature, defects that are not obvious or apparent at this time, may arise during the Term of this Agreement or afterward. Similarly, the Parties acknowledge and agree that, based on usage, there may also arise security concerns related to the continuing use of the New POS Device Mount. If one or more defects in the New POS Device Mounts arises such that the defect(s) poses a hazard to the public, makes the New POS Device Mounts unable to be operated as intended, or makes the New POS Device Mounts unacceptable based on Wal-Mart internal security protocols or standards, or noncompliant with applicable laws and PCI regulations, WalMart may, without breaching this Agreement: (a) suspend further installations of the New POS Device Mounts at all Subject Facilities; and (b) remove existing New POS Device Mounts from the Subject Facilities. If Wal-Mart makes such a decision, it will notify Plaintiffs’ Counsel and agrees to work with the CIL Plaintiffs in good faith to develop and determine a resolution to the defect and/or alternative designs that provide equivalent or greater access, if such resolution or alternative designs are possible.
4. Term of the Agreement
4.1 The term of this Agreement shall conclude when the last New POS Device Mount has been installed in the Subject Facilities.
5. Maintenance of New POS Device Mounts
5.1 Wal-Mart shall take reasonable steps to ensure that all features of the New POS Device Mounts are maintained in operable condition for use by people with mobility disabilities for the term of the Settlement Agreement. This includes, consistent with Wal-Mart’s regular check stand protocols, cleaning the POS device (e.g., magstripe slot, touchscreen display, scanner, scale, and receipt printer), inspecting the device for tampering, checking that the device readily tilts within the sleeve and slides in and out of the sleeve easily, ensuring that the cord properly extends and retracts, and troubleshooting, if necessary, consistent with the procedures described in Section 7.2 below.
5.2 To assist in maintaining the New POS Device Mounts, Wal-Mart already has in place several avenues for its customers to communicate concerns or issues with any aspect of their experience in a Wal-Mart store. Such avenues include, but are not limited to, communicating directly with a store manager or other Wal-Mart employee, approaching an in-store customer service counter, clicking on the “Contact Us” link on walmart.com, calling the customer service hotline at 1-800WALMART, or emailing Wal-Mart’s corporate customer service department by clicking on the “Email Customer Service” link at corporate.walmart.com/contact-us. Pursuant to Section 7.3, Wal-Mart shall also permit problems with the New POS Device Mounts to be communicated directly to a store supervisory staff member.
6. Signage at New POS Device Mounts
6.1 Wal-Mart will affix permanent, public-facing signage, attached hereto as Exhibit B, immediately below the lane number at each check stand at which a New POS Device Mount has
Page 5 of 11

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 7 of 21
been installed no later than seven (7) days after each New POS Device Mount is installed. The font size of the signage will be no smaller than 70 points. Wal-Mart shall maintain the signage referenced in this Section 6.1 so that it is visible at all times for the term of the Settlement Agreement.
7. Training
7.1 Wal-Mart shall provide a job aid, attached hereto as Exhibit C, to train cashiers and store supervisory personnel. Wal-Mart will maintain the job aid at each check stand with the New POS Device Mount, starting no later than seven (7) days after the installation of the New POS Device Mounts. At the time the job aid is first deployed at a Store, all cashiers shall personally be trained on the job aid. To the extent new cashiers are hired at a particular store after the job aid has been first deployed, the new cashiers shall be personally trained by the job aid. Training of the cashiers shall also include, consistent with Wal-Mart’s regular training program, specific hands-on and functional in-person training of the New POS Device Mount. The training will demonstrate proper usage of the New POS Device Mount (including removal and repositioning of the POS Device on the New POS Device Mount), provide instruction on offering and providing assistance to customers who wish to remove the device from the mount, and resolve any questions or concerns staff may have during the training.
7.2 Internal Monitoring of New POS Device Mounts. At the time each check stand equipped with a New POS Device Mount is first opened for service, or at such other intervals as Wal-Mart shall reasonably determine consistent with store operations, one or more designated employees shall inspect the New POS Device Mount to ensure such device is operating properly. This process includes, consistent with Wal-Mart’s regular check stand protocols, cleaning the POS device (e.g., magstripe slot, touchscreen display, scanner, scale, and receipt printer), inspecting the device for tampering, checking that the device readily tilts within the sleeve and slides in and out of the sleeve easily, ensuring that the cord properly extends and retracts, and troubleshooting if necessary. If the device is not functioning properly, the store manager shall take steps to get the problem corrected as soon as practical. Such steps include, consistent with Wal-Mart’s regular protocol, following specific steps to determine whether the issue can be corrected without the manufacturer’s assistance and, if not, contacting the manufacturer via telephone and/or email and having in-person discussions with the manufacturer. The store manager shall also take steps to ensure that at least two New POS Device Mounts remain functional in the Store. In addition, cashiers and supervisory personnel will be instructed to report any problems that arise during a shift concerning non-operable New POS Device Mounts to the store manager or assistant manager on duty. If a problem arises during a shift with the operation of a New POS Device Mount, the store manager will be instructed to undertake efforts to get the problem corrected.
7.3 Customer Service. Wal-Mart already has in place several avenues for its customers to communicate concerns or issues with any aspect of their experience in a Wal-Mart store. Such avenues include, but are not limited to, communicating directly with a store manager or other Wal-Mart employee, approaching an in-store customer service counter, clicking on the “Contact Us” link on walmart.com, calling the customer service hotline at 1-800-WALMART, or emailing WalMart’s corporate customer service department by clicking on the “Email Customer Service” link
Page 6 of 11

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 8 of 21
at corporate.walmart.com/contact-us. In those stores where the New POS Device Mounts are installed, Wal-Mart will ensure that its regular customer service procedures are implemented and followed with regard to the New POS Device Mounts.
8. Reporting
8.1 For the term of the Settlement Agreement, Wal-Mart shall send quarterly progress reports to Plaintiffs’ Counsel, with the first of these quarterly reports due ninety (90) days after the Effective Date. These reports will include:
(a) a list of the stores where the New POS Device Mounts have been installed in the prior quarter;
(b) a list of the stores where Wal-Mart intends to install the New POS Device Mounts in the upcoming quarter;
(c) an updated list of the planned installation schedule for all remaining stores; and
(d) a list of suspended or removed installations subject to Sections 3.3 and 3.4 in the prior quarter, and the reason for such suspension or removal.
The Parties acknowledge and understand that some of the information communicated as part of the reporting required by this Section 8.1 may be confidential, including information about new stores or remodel dates. In this regard, Wal-Mart reserves the right to redact or withhold certain store identifying information and, to the extent certain information is disclosed, Wal-Mart reserves the right to designate such information “Confidential.” In the event that Wal-Mart designates such information “Confidential,” Plaintiffs’ Counsel shall preserve the confidentiality of this information to the maximum extent feasible.
The reporting requirements of this Section 8.1 shall expire at the end of the term of this Agreement.
9. Enforcement of Agreement
All disputes concerning compliance with this Agreement shall be resolved as follows:
9.1 Written Notice with Time to Cure Noncompliance with Agreement. If CIL Plaintiffs believe that Wal-Mart is not in compliance with this Agreement, CIL Plaintiffs shall notify WalMart of the dispute, and Wal-Mart shall have thirty (30) days from receipt of said notice to cure the alleged breach or remedy the dispute. Once Wal-Mart cures the alleged breach or remedies the dispute, Wal-Mart shall notify Plaintiffs’ Counsel in writing that Wal-Mart has cured the alleged breach and explain what steps were taken to respond and cure. Wal-Mart shall provide this written notice to Plaintiffs’ Counsel within the 30-day period set forth in this paragraph. If CIL Plaintiffs are unsatisfied with the cure, they will provide notice rejecting the cure to WalMart within fourteen (14) days of the written notice from Wal-Mart. If the Parties’ cannot resolve a dispute regarding the cure directly, they will request a meeting with David Rotman or
Page 7 of 11

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 9 of 21
other mutually agreeable mediator in an attempt to mediate the dispute. The Parties agree to split costs associated with mediation unless the mediator determines a reallocation. The Parties agree to make best efforts to have any dispute mediated within 45 days of CIL Plaintiffs’ notice rejecting the cure.
9.2 Motion to Enforce. If the Parties are unable to resolve their dispute, the Parties may bring the dispute by motion to Judge Breyer or another judge or magistrate judge assigned by the Court to enforce the settlement. The decision of the judge shall be binding on the Parties.
10. Release
10.1 Release of Claims. In consideration for the promises made herein and for other good and valuable consideration pursuant to the Confidential Addendum, CIL, Janet Brown, and Lisa Kilgore, for themselves and on behalf of their respective heirs, assigns, executors, administrators, agents and successors, past and present (collectively referred to as the “Releasors”), hereby fully and without limitation, release, covenant not to sue, and forever discharge Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. and its subsidiaries, divisions, affiliated corporations, affiliated partnerships, parents, trustees, directors, officers, shareholders, partners, agents, employees, consultants, representatives, attorneys, assigns, executors and administrators, predecessors and successors, past and present, if any (collectively, the “Releasees”), both individually and collectively, from any and all rights, claims, demands, liabilities, actions and causes of action whether in law or in equity, suits, damages, losses, attorneys’ fees, costs, expenses and compensation, of whatever nature whatsoever, known or unknown, fixed or contingent, suspected or unsuspected (“Claims”), that Releasors now have, or may ever have had against any of the Releasees that arise out of, or are in any way related to: (a) injuries suffered or incurred by Releasors during any visit to any Subject Facilities prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement; (b) any alleged violation of any federal, state, local, or administrative law, rule, architectural guideline, building code, or other regulation relating to disability access or prohibiting discrimination by a public accommodation or any other claim that Releasors have asserted or could have asserted in the Lawsuit in relation to the Subject Facilities; (c) all claims and causes of action in the Lawsuit; and (d) any acts or omissions by the Releasees occurring prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement in relation to the Subject Facilities. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, Releasors generally and specifically release all Claims related to the Subject Facilities occurring prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement that arise out of or relate to violations of any federal or state statute, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq.; California Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code §§ 51, et seq.; the California Health and Safety Code §§ 19955, et seq.; the California Blind and Other Physically Disabled Persons Act, California Civil Code §§ 54, et seq.; Title 24 of the California Building Code; California Business and Professions Code §§ 17200, et seq.; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. §§ 701, et seq.; and any other federal, state, local, or administrative statute, rule, architectural guideline, building code, or other regulation relating to disability access or prohibiting disability discrimination by a public accommodation, as well as any and all common-law claims, including, but not limited to, negligence, fraud, misrepresentation, unfair competition, unfair business practices, infliction of emotional distress, assault, battery, false imprisonment, and violation of any other state or federal law, rule, or regulation.
Page 8 of 11

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 10 of 21
10.2 Civil Code Section 1542 Waiver. Releasors, upon the advice of legal counsel, waive all benefits under Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, as well as under any other statutes, laws of any of the states, and common-law principles of similar effect. CIL Plaintiffs acknowledge that they have read and understood Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, which provides as follows:
A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of executing the release, which is known by him or her must have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor.
11. Property Interest and Rights
The Parties’ agree that Wal-Mart has and shall retain any and all rights in and interest to the New POS Device Mounts, including any and all intellectual property rights and interests. The CIL Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs’ Counsel agree that they do not have and shall not assert any property or other interest in the New POS Device Mounts, and to the extent any such right or rights have ever existed, the CIL Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs’ Counsel hereby release, waive and relinquish any such rights.
12. Additional Terms
12.1 Entire Agreement. This Settlement Agreement and the Confidential Addendum contain the entire agreement and understanding of the Parties with respect to the matters set forth herein, and supersedes all other prior negotiations, agreements, documents, arrangements and undertakings with respect to matters set forth herein, which have been and are merged into this Settlement Agreement.
12.2 Amendment and Modification. The Settlement Agreement may not be orally amended or modified; this Agreement may only be modified or amended by a written instrument signed by or on behalf of CIL Plaintiffs and Wal-Mart, and expressing a specific intent to modify this Agreement.
12.3 Dismissal. Upon the Effective Date of this Agreement, CIL Plaintiffs shall take the appropriate action and file the appropriate motion or stipulation with the Court to dismiss the Lawsuit with prejudice as to CIL Plaintiffs, and without prejudice as to the putative class, subject to the Court retaining jurisdiction for the Term of the Agreement to enforce the Agreement and resolve any disputes relating to the Agreement.
12.4 Communications to Wal-Mart and CIL Plaintiffs. Unless otherwise indicated in the Agreement, all notices or communications required by this Agreement shall be in writing by email and U.S. Mail or overnight delivery service addressed as follows:
(a) To Wal-Mart: Steven M. Zadravecz, Jones Day, 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 800, Irvine, California 92612; szadravecz@jonesday.com
Page 9 of 11

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 11 of 21
(b) To CIL Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs’ Counsel: Disability Rights Advocates, Rebecca 
 Williford, 2001 Center Street, Fourth Floor, Berkeley, CA 94704; 
 rwilliford@dralegal.org.

12.5 Power and Authority. Each person executing this Settlement Agreement warrants and represents that he or she has the full power, capacity and authority to do so and has the authority to take appropriate action required or permitted to be taken pursuant to this Settlement Agreement to effectuate its terms.
12.6 No Assignment of Claims. CIL Plaintiffs represent and warrant that they own the claims, demands, rights, and interests that are the subject of this Settlement Agreement, have not assigned or transferred any of those claims, demands, rights, and interests, including by operation of law, and those claims, demands, rights, and interests are free of encumbrances and rights of other persons. CIL Plaintiffs agree to indemnify and hold Wal-Mart and each of the Releasees harmless from any liability, claims, demands, damages, expenses, and attorneys’ fees incurred by Wal-Mart or any of the Releasees as a result of any person or entity asserting any such assignment or transfer of any right or claim.
12.7 Counterparts and Signatures. This Settlement Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, and may be executed by facsimile or electronic signature. All executed counterparts, and each of them, shall be deemed to be one and the same instrument.
12.8 Preparation and Construction. All Parties have contributed substantially and materially to the preparation of this Settlement Agreement and the terms of the Agreement shall not be construed more strictly against one Party than another.
12.9 Headings. The section headings in this Settlement Agreement are for the Parties’ convenience and shall not be deemed a part of the various terms and provisions of this Settlement Agreement, nor used to limit the construction thereof.
12.10 Severability. If any provision of this Settlement Agreement is unenforceable or invalid under any applicable law or is so held by applicable court decision, such unenforceability or invalidity shall not render this Settlement Agreement unenforceable or invalid as a whole, and, in such event, the provision shall be changed and interpreted so as to best accomplish the objectives of the Parties within the limits of applicable law or applicable court decision. Notwithstanding the generality of the foregoing, if a court of competent jurisdiction finds the release provisions in Section 10, including 10.1 or 10.2, of this Agreement to be unenforceable or invalid as a result of a Party’s challenge, then this Agreement as to that particular Party shall become null and void and all amounts paid to that particular Party pursuant to the Confidential Addendum to this Settlement Agreement shall be returned to Wal-Mart within a reasonable period of time not to exceed thirty (30) days.
12.11 No Admission of Liability. This Settlement Agreement is made in settlement and compromise of a dispute, and no Party to this Settlement Agreement, by entering into it, admits wrongdoing, fault, or liability. This Settlement Agreement shall not be asserted by any Party as an admission of wrongdoing, fault, or liability. In addition, this Agreement shall not be
Page 10 of 11

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 12 of 21

admissible in any proceeding between the Parties, except a proceeding relating to a breach of its provisions after execution.
12.12 Successors and Assigns. The obligations and requirements set forth in this Settlement Agreement shall bind the agents, successors, affiliates, and actual assigns of each of the Parties.

12.13 Partida. Wal-Mart and George Partida have entered into an agreement, completely separate from this Settlement Agreement, to resolve Mr. Partida's claims against Wal-Mart on an individual, non-class basis.

12.14 Choice of Law. This Agreement is made and entered into in the State of California and shall, in all respects, be interpreted and enforced pursuant to the laws of the State of California, without regard to or application of any of California's conflict of laws rnles.

FOR CIL PLAINTIFFS:
f l ~ 1,c_L~--
\jl:met Brown t/

SIGNATURES
= Dated: 1 / 1
Dated: / /1.Q...

, 2017 , 2017

/fij _7J ~

Stuart"James

·

:7 , Dated~;vf~,

2017

Executive Director, Center for Independent Living, Inc.

itJ..
Pr~ldt11f · 11-uJ E.!a+<.<t'-
APPROVED AS TO FORM: Disability Rights Advocates

Dated: Dated:

\ l,1
I [ 11-
I

, 2017 , 2017

/J f Dated: 1 I

, 2017

Page 11 of 11

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 13 of 21
Exhibit A 


Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 14 of 21

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 15 of 21

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 16 of 21

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 17 of 21

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 18 of 21
Exhibit B 


Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 19 of 21

This register

This register is equipped with a detachable card reader.

is equipped

with a

detachable

card reader.

2017 © Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 20 of 21
Exhibit C


Case 3:12-cv-03885-CRB Document 89-1 Filed 01/19/17 Page 21 of 21

Detachable Card Reader Job Aid

The detachable card reader is connected to a retractable

tether and can be removed from its base for people with
Key mobility disabilities who use wheelchairs or scooters.

Points

Lanes with a detachable card reader are designated by a sign located near the lane number.

Offer to assist any customer who attempts to remove and/or replace the card reader from its cradle. Assistance may include coming around the register into the aisle and physically removing the reader and then handing it to the customer.

Never ask for a customer's PIN when helping with the reader.

The reader may reset (turn off) if hit or bumped too hard. If this happens during a transaction, _ _ _ _ _ _ f_o_llo_w_ t_h_e _tr_ou_b_le_s_ho_o_ti_ng_ s_t_ep_s_fo_r_d_eb_it_r_ea_d_e_rs_fo_u_n_d_on_ _Se_rv_ic_e_D_e_sk_O_n_li_ne_. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Steps
For Use

Holding onto side handles, pull up to remove card reader.

Align card reader with guide rails on cradle and ease back into starting position.

For use in lap, pull towards your person.

After each use, always ensure the card reader is returned to “HOME” position (middle position).

To replace, make sure there is no slack in the cable. Holding onto side handles, allow cable to guide the card reader back into the cradle.

 
 Case: 3:12-cv-3885 As of: 05/19/2020 07:30 PM PDT 1 of 12
CLOSED,CONSOL,PRVADR,STAYED
U.S. District Court California Northern District (San Francisco) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:12−cv−03885−CRB

Center for Independent Living, Inc. et al v. Wal−Mart Stores, Inc. Assigned to: Hon. Charles R. Breyer Relate Case Case: 3:13−cv−00305−CRB Cause: 42:12101 Americans w/ Disabilities Act (ADA)
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 07/25/2012 Date Terminated: 01/23/2017 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 446 American with Disabilities − Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Center for Independent Living, Inc.

represented by Arlene Brynne Mayerson Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, Inc. 3075 Adeline Street, Suite 210 Berkeley, CA 94703 (510) 644−2555 Fax: (510) 841−8645 Email: AMayerson@dredf.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Bill Lann Lee Civil Rights Education & Enforcement Center 2120 University Avenue Berkeley, CA 94704 510−431−8484 Email: blee@creeclaw.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Catha Alison Worthman Feinberg Jackson Worthman & Wasow LLP 2030 Addison Street, Suite 500 Berkeley, CA 94704 (510) 269−7998 Fax: (510) 269−7994 Email: catha@feinbergjackson.com TERMINATED: 10/27/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Christine Chuang California Department of Justice 455 Golden Gate Avenue Suite 11000 San Francisco, CA 94102−7004 415−510−3525 Email: christine.chuang@doj.ca.gov TERMINATED: 07/14/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Kevin Martin Knestrick Asian Law Alliance Federal Pro Se Program United States District Court 280 South 1st Street Room 2070

Case: 3:12-cv-3885 As of: 05/19/2020 07:30 PM PDT 2 of 12
San Jose, CA 95113 408−297−1480 Email: kevin.knestrick@lawfoundation.org TERMINATED: 09/08/2014 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Laurence Wayne Paradis Disability Rights Advocates 2001 Center Street, 3rd Floor Berkeley, CA 94704−1204 510−665−8644 Fax: 510−665−8511 Email: larryp@dralegal.org TERMINATED: 08/04/2016 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Shira Tamar Wakschlag Lewis Feinberg Lee & Jackson, PC 476 9th Street Oakland, CA 94607 510−839−6824 Fax: 510−839−7839 Email: swakschlag@lewisfeinberg.com TERMINATED: 03/25/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Julia Campins Campins Benham−Baker, LLP 935 Moraga Road, Suite 200 Lafayette, CA 94549 415−373−5333 Fax: 415−373−5334 Email: julia@campinsbenhambaker.com TERMINATED: 10/12/2012
Mary−Lee Kimber Smith Disability RIghts Advocates 2001 Center Street Fourth Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 510−665−8644 x 114 Fax: 510−665−8511 Email: mkimber@dralegal.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Meredith Jayne Weaver Disability Rights Advocates 2001 Center St., Fourth Floor Berkeley, CA 94704 510−665−8644 Fax: 510−665−8511 Email: mweaver@dralegal.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Rebecca Susanne Williford Disability Rights Advocates 2001 Center Street, 4th Floor Berkeley, CA 94704−1204 (510) 665−8644 Fax: (510) 665−8511 Email: rwilliford@dralegal.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 3:12-cv-3885 As of: 05/19/2020 07:30 PM PDT 3 of 12

Plaintiff Janet Brown
Plaintiff Lisa Kilgore on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated

represented by Arlene Brynne Mayerson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bill Lann Lee (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Catha Alison Worthman (See above for address) TERMINATED: 10/27/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Christine Chuang (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/14/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kevin Martin Knestrick (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/08/2014 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Laurence Wayne Paradis (See above for address) TERMINATED: 08/04/2016 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Shira Tamar Wakschlag (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/25/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Julia Campins (See above for address) TERMINATED: 10/12/2012
Mary−Lee Kimber Smith (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Meredith Jayne Weaver (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Rebecca Susanne Williford (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Arlene Brynne Mayerson (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Case: 3:12-cv-3885 As of: 05/19/2020 07:30 PM PDT 4 of 12

Plaintiff
George Partida on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated

Bill Lann Lee (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Catha Alison Worthman (See above for address) TERMINATED: 10/27/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Christine Chuang (See above for address) TERMINATED: 07/14/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kevin Martin Knestrick (See above for address) TERMINATED: 09/08/2014 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Laurence Wayne Paradis (See above for address) TERMINATED: 08/04/2016 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Shira Tamar Wakschlag (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/25/2015 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Julia Campins (See above for address) TERMINATED: 10/12/2012
Mary−Lee Kimber Smith (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Meredith Jayne Weaver (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Rebecca Susanne Williford (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Julie Mehrban Mehrban Law Corporation APC Ste 1000 15233 Ventura Boulevard Suite 1000 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 424−777−3319 Email: julie@mehrbanlaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Laurence Wayne Paradis (See above for address)

Case: 3:12-cv-3885 As of: 05/19/2020 07:30 PM PDT 5 of 12
TERMINATED: 08/04/2016 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bill Lann Lee (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Mary−Lee Kimber Smith (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Rebecca Susanne Williford (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.

represented by Mark Easton Earnest Jones Day 3161 Michelson Drive Suite 800 Irvine, CA 92612 949−851−3939 Fax: 949−553−7539 Email: mearnest@jonesday.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert Allan Naeve Jones Day 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 800 Irvine, CA 92614 (949) 851−3939 Fax: (949) 553−7539 Email: rnaeve@jonesday.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Steven Mark Zadravecz Jones Day 3161 Michelson Drive Suite 800 Irvine, CA 92612 949−851−3939 Fax: 949−553−7539 Email: szadravecz@jonesday.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 07/25/2012
07/25/2012

# Docket Text
1 CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT against Wal−Mart Stores, Inc. ( Filing fee $ 350, receipt number 34611076777). Filed byCenter for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore, Janet Brown. (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/25/2012) (Additional attachment(s) added on 7/27/2012: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet) (far, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 07/27/2012)
2 Scheduling Order for Cases Asserting Denial of Right of Access under Americans with Disabilities Act. (Attachments: # 1 Standing Order)(far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/25/2012) (Entered: 07/27/2012)

Case: 3:12-cv-3885 As of: 05/19/2020 07:30 PM PDT 6 of 12

07/25/2012 08/09/2012 08/09/2012 09/25/2012 09/25/2012 10/09/2012 10/12/2012 10/22/2012 10/23/2012 10/23/2012
11/20/2012
11/21/2012
02/08/2013 02/08/2013 03/06/2013 03/07/2013

3 Summons Issued as to Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (far, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/25/2012) (far, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 07/27/2012)
4 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed filed by Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore, Janet Brown. Service waived by All Plaintiffs. (Knestrick, Kevin) (Filed on 8/9/2012) (Entered: 08/09/2012)
5 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Janet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore.. (Knestrick, Kevin) (Filed on 8/9/2012) (Entered: 08/09/2012)
6 ANSWER to Complaint byWal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Naeve, Robert) (Filed on 9/25/2012) (Entered: 09/25/2012)
7 Certificate of Interested Entities by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc. (Naeve, Robert) (Filed on 9/25/2012) (Entered: 09/25/2012)
8 CLERKS NOTICE re Consent to Proceed Before Magistrate Judge and Request for Reassignment to a United States District Judge due by 10/22/2012. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/9/2012) (Entered: 10/09/2012)
9 NOTICE of Change In Counsel by Catha Alison Worthman (Worthman, Catha) (Filed on 10/12/2012) (Entered: 10/12/2012)
10 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc... (Naeve, Robert) (Filed on 10/22/2012) (Entered: 10/22/2012)
11 CLERK'S NOTICE of Impending Reassignment to U.S. District Judge. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/23/2012) (Entered: 10/23/2012)
12 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Hon. Charles R. Breyer for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Laurel Beeler no longer assigned to the case. Signed by Executive Committee on 10/23/12. (sv, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/23/2012) (Entered: 10/23/2012)
13 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER JOINT STIPULATION AND MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF FROM GENERAL ORDER NO. 56 TO PERMIT PARTIES TO PURSUE ALTERNATIVE SETTLEMENT PROCEDURES; [proposed] ORDER filed by Janet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore. (Knestrick, Kevin) (Filed on 11/20/2012) (Entered: 11/20/2012)
14 ORDER granting 13 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER JOINT STIPULATION AND MOTION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RELIEF FROM GENERAL ORDER NO. 56 TO PERMIT PARTIES TO PURSUE ALTERNATIVE SETTLEMENT PROCEDURES filed by Center for Independent Living, Inc., et al. Case referred to Private ADR. Case Management Statement due by 5/10/2013. Initial Case Management Conference set for 5/17/2013 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco.. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 11/21/2012. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/21/2012) (Entered: 11/21/2012)
15 MOTION to Relate Case ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION TO CONSIDER WHETHER CASES SHOULD BE RELATED PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 3−12 filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Earnest, Mark) (Filed on 2/8/2013) (Entered: 02/08/2013)
16 AMENDED Proof of Service by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc. re 15 MOTION to Relate Case. (Earnest, Mark) (Filed on 2/8/2013) Modified on 2/11/2013 (mclS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/08/2013)
17 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Janet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore <Proof of Service of Standing Orders> (Knestrick, Kevin) (Filed on 3/6/2013) Modified on 3/7/2013 (mclS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 03/06/2013)
18 MOTION to Consolidate Cases filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. Motion Hearing set for 4/12/2013 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Charles R. Breyer. Responses due by 3/21/2013. Replies due by 3/28/2013. (Attachments: # 1 Memo of P&As ISO of Motion, # 2 Declaration of Steven M. Zadravecz ISO of Motion, # 3 Proposed Order)(Earnest, Mark) (Filed on 3/7/2013) (Entered: 03/07/2013)

Case: 3:12-cv-3885 As of: 05/19/2020 07:30 PM PDT 7 of 12

03/08/2013 03/08/2013 03/08/2013
03/08/2013
03/08/2013
03/08/2013
03/08/2013
03/08/2013 03/08/2013 04/03/2013 04/03/2013

19 ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting 15 Motion to Relate Case C−13−0305YGR to C−12−3885 CRB (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/8/2013) (Entered: 03/08/2013)
20 Statement re 18 MOTION to Consolidate Cases PLAINTIFFS' STATEMENT OF NONOPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT WALMART STORES, INC.'S MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 42 by Janet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore. (Knestrick, Kevin) (Filed on 3/8/2013) (Entered: 03/08/2013)
21 MOTION to Appoint Counsel PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION REQUESTING APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL PURSUANT TO RULE 23(G) filed by Janet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore. Motion Hearing set for 4/12/13 at 10:00 am. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order [Proposed] Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion Requesting Appointment Of Interim Class Counsel Pursuant To Rule 23(G))(Knestrick, Kevin) (Filed on 3/8/2013) Modified on 3/11/2013 (mclS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 03/08/2013)
22 Declaration of Kevin Knestrick in Support of 21 MOTION to Appoint Counsel PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION REQUESTING APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL PURSUANT TO RULE 23(G) DECLARATION OF KEVIN KNESTRICK IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION REQUESTING APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL filed byJanet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Related document(s) 21 ) (Knestrick, Kevin) (Filed on 3/8/2013) (Entered: 03/08/2013)
23 Declaration of Laurence W. Paradis in Support of 21 MOTION to Appoint Counsel PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION REQUESTING APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL PURSUANT TO RULE 23(G) DECLARATION OF LAURENCE W. PARADIS IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION REQUESTING APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL filed byJanet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Related document(s) 21 ) (Knestrick, Kevin) (Filed on 3/8/2013) (Entered: 03/08/2013)
24 Declaration of Bill Lann Lee in Support of 21 MOTION to Appoint Counsel PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION REQUESTING APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL PURSUANT TO RULE 23(G) DECLARATION OF BILL LANN LEE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION REQUESTING APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL filed byJanet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore. (Related document(s) 21 ) (Knestrick, Kevin) (Filed on 3/8/2013) (Entered: 03/08/2013)
25 Declaration of Arlene B. Mayerson in Support of 21 MOTION to Appoint Counsel PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION REQUESTING APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL PURSUANT TO RULE 23(G) DECLARATION OF ARLENE B. MAYERSON IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION REQUESTING APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL filed byJanet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore. (Related document(s) 21 ) (Knestrick, Kevin) (Filed on 3/8/2013) (Entered: 03/08/2013)
26 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Janet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore re 20 Statement, 21 MOTION to Appoint Counsel PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION REQUESTING APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL PURSUANT TO RULE 23(G) PROOF OF SERVICE (Knestrick, Kevin) (Filed on 3/8/2013) (Entered: 03/08/2013)
Set/Reset Deadlines as to 21 MOTION to Appoint Counsel PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION REQUESTING APPOINTMENT OF INTERIM CLASS COUNSEL PURSUANT TO RULE 23(G). Motion Hearing set for 4/12/2013 10:00 AM before Hon. Charles R. Breyer. (mclS, COURT STAFF) (Entered: 03/11/2013)
27 Order by Hon. Charles R. Breyer granting 21 Motion to Appoint Interim Class Counsel.(tlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/3/2013) (Entered: 04/03/2013)
28 ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES C−12−3885 CRB & C−13−0305 CRB by Hon. Charles R. Breyer re (18) Motion to Consolidate Cases 3:13−cv−00305−CRB(tlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/3/2013). DRA,DREDF and Lewis Feingber Interim Class Counsel. (Entered: 04/03/2013)

Case: 3:12-cv-3885 As of: 05/19/2020 07:30 PM PDT 8 of 12

04/19/2013 04/25/2013
05/07/2013 06/13/2013 06/18/2013 09/06/2013 09/10/2013 12/20/2013 01/02/2014 03/28/2014 04/02/2014 05/30/2014 06/03/2014 08/29/2014 09/04/2014 09/08/2014

29 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER (JOINT) TO MODIFY NOVEMBER 2012 ORDER filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Earnest, Mark) (Filed on 4/19/2013) (Entered: 04/19/2013)
30 ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting 29 Stipulation to modify November 2012 Order. Mediation continued to 6/7/2013, report on result of mediation continued to 6/14/2013 and by 5/31/2013 parties will complete their exchange information and documents relevant to the dispute including the information required by GO No 56, 2−6. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/25/2013) (Entered: 04/25/2013)
CLERKS NOTICE (text entry only, no document assosciated with this entry). Case Management Statement due by 6/14/2013. Initial Case Management Conference reset for 6/21/2013 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/7/2013) (Entered: 05/07/2013)
31 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER for 90−Day Stay While Conducting Mediation filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 6/13/2013) (Entered: 06/13/2013)
32 ORDER STAYING CASE for 90 Day while conduction mediation. Status Report due by 9/13/2013. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 6/17/2013. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/18/2013) (Entered: 06/18/2013)
33 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER FOR A 90−DAY STAY WHILE PURSUING RESOLUTION filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 9/6/2013) (Entered: 09/06/2013)
34 ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting 33 Stipulation for 90 day stay while pursuing resolution (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/10/2013) (Entered: 09/10/2013)
35 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER For a 90−Day Stay While Pursuing Resolution filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 12/20/2013) (Entered: 12/20/2013)
36 STIPULATION FOR 90−DAY STAY WHILE PURSUING RESOLUTION AND ORDER by Hon. Charles R. Breyer granting 35 Stipulation.(tlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/2/2014) (Entered: 01/02/2014)
37 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER FOR A 60−DAY STAY WHILE PURSUING RESOLUTION filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 3/28/2014) (Entered: 03/28/2014)
38 ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting 37 Stipulation for 60−Day stay while pursuing resolution (lrcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/2/2014) (Entered: 04/02/2014)
39 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER for Additional 90−Day Stay While Pursuing Resolution filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 5/30/2014) (Entered: 05/30/2014)
40 ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting 39 Stipulation for Additional 90−Day (9/5/2014) Stay While Pursuing Resolution (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/3/2014) (Entered: 06/03/2014)
41 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL STAY WHILE PURSUING RESOLUTION filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 8/29/2014) (Entered: 08/29/2014)
42 ORDER granting 41 STIPULATION FOR ADDITIONAL STAY WHILE PURSUING RESOLUTION filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. Status Report due by 12/5/2015. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 9/4/2014. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/4/2014) (Entered: 09/04/2014)
43 NOTICE of Change In Counsel by Laurence Wayne Paradis Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel (Paradis, Laurence) (Filed on 9/8/2014) (Entered: 09/08/2014)

Case: 3:12-cv-3885 As of: 05/19/2020 07:30 PM PDT 9 of 12

12/05/2014 12/15/2014 12/16/2014 12/19/2014 03/13/2015 03/16/2015 03/25/2015 03/25/2015 05/29/2015 06/04/2015 06/05/2015
07/14/2015 10/01/2015 10/07/2015 10/27/2015 11/13/2015

44 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL STAY WHILE PURSUING RESOLUTION filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Earnest, Mark) (Filed on 12/5/2014) (Entered: 12/05/2014)
45 ORDER granting 44 STIPULATION FOR ADDITIONAL STAY WHILE PURSUING RESOLUTION filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. Status Report due by 3/13/2015. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 12/15/2014. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/15/2014) (Entered: 12/15/2014)
46 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER REGARDING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Earnest, Mark) (Filed on 12/16/2014) (Entered: 12/16/2014)
47 ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting 46 Stipulation REGARDING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/19/2014) (Entered: 12/19/2014)
48 STATUS REPORT (JOINT) by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 3/13/2015) (Entered: 03/13/2015)
49 CLERK'S NOTICE Case Management Statement due by 5/29/2015. Further Case Management Conference set for 6/5/2015 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (text entry only, no document associated with this entry.)(beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/16/2015) (Entered: 03/16/2015)
50 NOTICE by Janet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore, George Partida of Firm Name Change (Lee, Bill) (Filed on 3/25/2015) (Entered: 03/25/2015)
51 NOTICE by Janet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore, George Partida of Withdrawal of Individual Counsel (Lee, Bill) (Filed on 3/25/2015) (Entered: 03/25/2015)
52 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT (JOINT) & PROPOSED ORDER filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Earnest, Mark) (Filed on 5/29/2015) (Entered: 05/29/2015)
53 CLERK'S NOTICE (This is a text−only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) Further Case Management Conference reset for 10:00 AM on Friday, 6/5/2015 in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco.(beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/4/2015) (Entered: 06/04/2015)
54 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. Charles R. Breyer: Further Case Management Conference held on 6/5/2015. Supplemental Case Management Statement due by 10/2/2105. Further Case Management Conference set for 10/9/2015 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Court Reporter: − Not reported. Plaintiff Attorney: Laurence Paradis. Defendant Attorney: Steve Zadravecz. This is a text only Minute Entry (beS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 6/5/2015) (Entered: 06/08/2015)
55 NOTICE of Change In Counsel by Laurence Wayne Paradis NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF COUNSEL (Paradis, Laurence) (Filed on 7/14/2015) (Entered: 07/14/2015)
56 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT (JOINT SUPPLEMENTAL) filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Earnest, Mark) (Filed on 10/1/2015) (Entered: 10/01/2015)
57 CLERK'S NOTICE resetting CMC. Case Management Statement due by 11/13/2015. Further Case Management Conference set for 11/20/2015 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/7/2015) text entry only, no document associated with this entry. (Entered: 10/07/2015)
58 NOTICE by Janet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore of Withdrawal of Individual Counsel Catha Worthman (Lee, Bill) (Filed on 10/27/2015) (Entered: 10/27/2015)
59 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT (JOINT SUPPLEMENTAL) filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 11/13/2015) (Entered:

Case: 3:12-cv-3885 As of: 05/19/2020 07:30 PM PDT 10 of 12

11/17/2015 11/20/2015
02/10/2016 02/18/2016 02/19/2016
03/18/2016 04/15/2016 04/19/2016 06/17/2016 06/20/2016 08/04/2016 08/05/2016 08/08/2016

11/13/2015)
60 NOTICE of Appearance by Rebecca Susanne Williford NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF REBECCA WILLIFORD (Williford, Rebecca) (Filed on 11/17/2015) (Entered: 11/17/2015)
61 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. Charles R. Breyer: Further Case Management Conference held on 11/20/2015. Further Case Management Conference continued to Friday, 2/19/2016 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Case Management Statement due by 2/12/2016.
Not Reported. Plaintiff Attorney Rebecca Williford. Defendant Attorney Steven Zadravecz. This is a text only Minute Entry (tmiS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 11/20/2015) (Entered: 11/20/2015)
62 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 2/10/2016) (Entered: 02/10/2016)
63 CLERK'S NOTICE resetting the time only for CMC. Further Case Management Conference reset for 10:00 AM on 2/19/2016 in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (This is a text−only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/18/2016) (Entered: 02/18/2016)
64 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. Charles R. Breyer: Further Case Management Conference held on 2/19/2016. Supplemental Case Management Statement due by 4/15/2016. Further Case Management Conference set for 4/22/2016 10:00 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. Total Time: 1 minute. Court Reporter: − not reported. Plaintiff Attorney Rebecca Williford. Defendant Attorney Mark Earnest. This is a text only Minute Entry (beS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 2/19/2016) (Entered: 02/22/2016)
65 CLERK'S NOTICE: Further Case Management Conference reset for 4/21/2016 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (This is a text−only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/18/2016) (Entered: 03/18/2016)
66 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 4/15/2016) (Entered: 04/15/2016)
67 CLERK'S NOTICE Continuing CMC. Supplemental Case Management Statement due by 6/17/2016. Further Case Management Conference reset for 6/24/2016 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/19/2016). (This is a text−only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (Entered: 04/19/2016)
68 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT Joint Case Management Statement filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 6/17/2016) (Entered: 06/17/2016)
69 CLERK'S NOTICE : Case Management Statement due by 8/5/2016. Further Case Management Conference set for 8/12/2016 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/20/2016) (This is a text−only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (Entered: 06/20/2016)
70 NOTICE of Substitution of Counsel by Meredith Jayne Weaver (Weaver, Meredith) (Filed on 8/4/2016) (Entered: 08/04/2016)
71 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 8/5/2016) (Entered: 08/05/2016)
72 CLERK'S NOTICE Resetting the TIME ONLY for CMC. Further Case Management Conference reset for 10:00 AM on 8/12/2016 in Courtroom

Case: 3:12-cv-3885 As of: 05/19/2020 07:30 PM PDT 11 of 12

08/08/2016 08/10/2016 08/12/2016
09/13/2016 09/29/2016 10/07/2016 10/07/2016 10/12/2016 10/14/2016
12/09/2016 12/09/2016 12/12/2016 12/16/2016

6, 17th Floor, San Francisco. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/8/2016) (This is a text−only entry generated by the court. There is no document associated with this entry.) (Entered: 08/08/2016)
73 MOTION to Appear by Telephone and Proposed Order filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 8/8/2016) (Entered: 08/08/2016)
74 ORDER by Judge Charlesl R. Breyer granting 73 Motion to Appear by Telephone. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/10/2016) (Entered: 08/10/2016)
75 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. Charles R. Breyer: Further Case Management Conference held on 8/12/2016. Status Report due by 10/7/2016. Status Conference set for 10/14/2016 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Charles R. Breyer. v Total Time in Court: 5 minutes. Court Reporter: Not reported. Plaintiff Attorney: Rebecca Williford, Mary−Lee Smith. Defendant Attorney: Steven Zadravecz and Mark Earnest by telephone. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 8/12/2016) This is a text only Minute Entry (Entered: 08/12/2016)
76 STIPULATION of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 9/13/2016) (Entered: 09/13/2016)
Set Deadlines/Hearings re 08/12/2016 doc 75 Minute Entry. Status Report due by 10/7/2016. Status Conference set for 10/14/2016 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Charles R. Breyer. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/29/2016) Modified on 9/29/2016 (beS, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 09/29/2016)
77 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT and Proposed Order filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 10/7/2016) (Entered: 10/07/2016)
78 MOTION to Appear by Telephone at Further Case Management Conference; [Proposed] Order filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 10/7/2016) (Entered: 10/07/2016)
79 ORDER by Judge Charles R. Breyer granting 78 Motion to Appear by Telephone. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/12/2016) (Entered: 10/12/2016)
80 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. Charles R. Breyer: Status Conference held on 10/14/2016. The Court adopts deadlines. Status Report due by 12/9/2016. Status Conference set for 12/16/2016 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Charles R. Breyer. Total Time in Court 3 minutes. Court Reporter: Not reported. Plaintiff Attorney: Rebeca Wiliford, Meredith Weaver. Defendant Attorney: Steven Zadravecz by telephone. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 10/14/2016)This is a text only Minute Entry (Entered: 10/14/2016)
81 STATUS REPORT JOINT STATUS REPORT by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 12/9/2016) (Entered: 12/09/2016)
82 MOTION to Appear by Telephone at Further Case Management Conference; [Proposed] Order filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 12/9/2016) (Entered: 12/09/2016)
83 Order by Hon. Charles R. Breyer granting 82 Motion to Appear by Telephone. Counsel is requested to contact CourtCall. (afmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/12/2016) (Entered: 12/12/2016)
84 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Hon. Charles R. Breyer: Status Conference held on 12/16/2016. Parties have reached a settlement agreement. Further Status Conference set for 1/20/2017 08:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Charles R. Breyer. FTR Time 8:36 − 8:37. Plaintiff Attorneys: Rebecca Williford, Meredith Weaver. Defendant Attorneys: Steven Zadravecz, Jim Day, both appearing by telephone. This is a text only Minute Entry. There is no pdf image associated with this entry.

Case: 3:12-cv-3885 As of: 05/19/2020 07:30 PM PDT 12 of 12

01/13/2017 01/17/2017 01/17/2017
01/18/2017
01/19/2017
01/23/2017

(afmS, COURT STAFF) (Date Filed: 12/16/2016) (Entered: 12/16/2016)
85 STATUS REPORT JOINT STATUS REPORT by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 1/13/2017) (Entered: 01/13/2017)
86 MOTION to Appear by Telephone and Proposed Order filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Filed on 1/17/2017) (Entered: 01/17/2017)
87 ORDER: Re 85 Status Report filed by Wal−Mart Stores, Inc.: Status Report or dismissal filing due by 2/17/2017. Status Conference set for 2/24/2017 at 8:30 AM in Courtroom 6, 17th Floor, San Francisco before Hon. Charles R. Breyer. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 1/17/2017. (lsS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/17/2017) (Entered: 01/17/2017)
88 ORDER GRANTING REQUEST TO APPEAR TELEPHONICALLY AT FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 86 Motion to Appear by Telephone. Counsel to make arrangements through CourtCall. (ls, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/18/2017) (Entered: 01/18/2017)
89 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER Of Voluntary Dismissal Of Case & Retention Of Jurisdiction To Enforce Settlement Agreement filed by Janet Brown, Center for Independent Living, Inc., Lisa Kilgore, George Partida. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Proposed Order)(Williford, Rebecca) (Filed on 1/19/2017) (Entered: 01/19/2017)
90 ORDER RE STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF CASE AND RETENTION OF JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT by Judge Charles R. Breyer: Granting 89 Stipulation. (lsS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/23/2017) (Entered: 01/23/2017)

 
 Case: 3:13-cv-00305-CRB As of: 05/24/2013 06:16 AM PDT 1 of 3
ADRMOP,CONSOL,RELATE
U.S. District Court California Northern District (San Francisco) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:13−cv−00305−CRB

George Partida v. Wal−Mart Stores Inc Assigned to: Hon. Charles R. Breyer Relate Case Case: 3:12−cv−03885−CRB
Case in other court: California Central, 2:12−cv−10015 Cause: 28:1441 Petition for Removal− Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 01/22/2013 Jury Demand: Plaintiff Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Diversity

George Partida on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated

represented by Julie Mehrban , Mehrban Law Corporation APC Ste 1000 15233 Ventura Boulevard Suite 1000 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 424−777−3319 Fax: Email: julie@mehrbanlaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Wal−Mart Stores Inc

represented by Mark Easton Earnest Jones Day 3161 Michelson Drive Suite 800 Irvine, Ca 92612 949−851−3939 Email: mearnest@jonesday.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert A Naeve Jones Day 3161 Michelson Drive Suite 800 Irvine, CA 92612 949−851−3939 Fax: 949−553−7539 Email: rnaeve@jonesday.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Steven M Zadravecz Jones Day 3161 Michelson Drive Suite 800 Irvine, CA 92612 949−851−3939 Fax: 949 851 7539 Email: szadravecz@jonesday.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 11/21/2012

# Docket Text
1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Superior Court of CA for the County of Los Angeles, Central District, Stanley Mosk Courthouse, case number BC488176 with CONFORMED FILED copy of summons and complaint. Case assigned to Judge John A Kronstadt, Discovery to Magistrate Judge Victor B. Kenton. (Filing fee $ 350 PAID. ), filed by Defendant Wal−Mart Stores Inc. (et) (mg). (Entered: 11/27/2012)

Case: 3:13-cv-00305-CRB As of: 05/24/2013 06:16 AM PDT 2 of 3

11/21/2012 11/21/2012 11/21/2012 12/10/2012 12/10/2012
12/10/2012 12/12/2012 01/15/2013 01/16/2013
01/16/2013 01/22/2013
01/22/2013

CONFORMED FILED COPY OF ANSWER to Complaint 1 filed by Defendant Wal−Mart Stores Inc. [Filed in State Court on 11/20/2012 Submitted Attached to Exhibit B to Notice of Removal.] (et) (Entered: 11/27/2012)
2 CERTIFICATION AS TO Interested Parties AND FRCP 71 CORPORATE DISCLOSURE filed by Defendant Wal−Mart Stores Inc. (et) (mg). (Entered: 11/27/2012)
3 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT−DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (et) (Entered: 11/27/2012)
4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE filed by Defendant Wal−Mart Stores Inc, re Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties 2 , Notice of Removal, 1 , Notice to Parties of Court−Directed ADR Program (ADR−8) 3 served on November 21, 2012. (Earnest, Mark) (Entered: 12/10/2012)
5 INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOR CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE JOHN A. KRONSTADT by Judge John A Kronstadt: Please read this Order carefully. It governs this case and differs in some respect from the Local Rules. The Initial Standing Order can also be found on the Court's Website under Judge Kronstadt's Procedures and Schedules, which is always the most recent and updated version. (dfi) (Entered: 12/10/2012)
6 ORDER SETTING RULE 16(b) SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge John A Kronstadt: The Scheduling Conference is set for February 25, 2013, at 1:30 p.m., with the Joint Report, which shall include the completed Schedule of Pretrial and Trial Dates, to be filed no later than February 15, 2013. (Attachments: # 1 Schedule of Pretrial and Trial Dates) (dfi) (Entered: 12/10/2012)
7 NOTICE of Change of Attorney Information for attorney Steven M Zadravecz counsel for Defendant Wal−Mart Stores Inc. Adding Steven M. Zadravecz as attorney as counsel of record for Wal−Mart Stores, Inc. for the reason indicated in the G−06 Notice. Filed by Defendant Wal−Mart Stores, Inc. (Zadravecz, Steven) (Entered: 12/12/2012)
8 Joint STIPULATION to Transfer Case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California filed by Defendant Wal−Mart Stores Inc. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order re Joint Stipulation to Transfer)(Zadravecz, Steven) (Entered: 01/15/2013)
9 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Stipulation to Transfer Case 8 . The following error(s) was found: Local Rule 7.1−1 No Certification of Interested Parties and or no copies. The document is accepted as filed. Counsel shall take notice of the CM/ECF procedures. any future document will be stricken for failure to follow the procedures. COUNSEL SHALL E−FILE THE CERTIFICATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES ASAP. (rne) (Entered: 01/16/2013)
10 Certification of Interested Parties filed by Defendant Wal−Mart Stores Inc, (Zadravecz, Steven) (Entered: 01/16/2013)
11 ORDER GRANTING JOINT STIPULATION by Judge John A. Kronstadt: Based on the parties Joint Stipulation, the Court hereby orders as follows: 1. The elements necessary to transfer the present action under 28 U.S.C. § 1404 to the Northern District of California are satisfied. 2. The present action shall be transferred to the Northern District of California where it may be coordinated with Center for Independent Living, Inc. v. Wal−Mart Stores, Inc., Case No. 3:12−CV−03885−CRB. 3. All future dates currently scheduled in the present action in the Central District of California shall be vacated. transferring case to Northern District of California (Electronic Original file, electronic copy of the transfer order and docket sheet can be obtained through PACER). (MD JS−6. Case Terminated.). (Attachments: # 1 Letter of Transfer) (ir) (Entered: 01/22/2013)
12 Case transferred in from District of California Central; Case Number 2:12−cv−10015. Case file Electronicaly transfered, order and docket sheet received. Modified on 1/28/2013 (cjl, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 01/28/2013)

Case: 3:13-cv-00305-CRB As of: 05/24/2013 06:16 AM PDT 3 of 3

01/22/2013 01/28/2013 02/08/2013 02/11/2013 02/11/2013 02/12/2013 02/21/2013 02/21/2013 03/08/2013
03/11/2013
04/03/2013

13 ADR SCHEDULING ORDER: Case Management Statement due by 4/16/2013. Case Management Conference set for 4/23/2013 01:30 PM in Courtroom 4, 3rd Floor, Oakland. (Attachments: # 1 Standing Order)(cjl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/22/2013) (Entered: 01/28/2013)
14 CLERKS NOTICE Re: Case Transfer in Received from Central District of California, their Case No. 2:12−cv−10015−JAK−VBK. (cjl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/28/2013) (Entered: 01/28/2013)
15 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by Wal−Mart Stores Inc.. (Earnest, Mark) (Filed on 2/8/2013) (Entered: 02/08/2013)
16 CLERK'S NOTICE of Impending Reassignment to U.S. District Judge. (cjl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/11/2013) (Entered: 02/11/2013)
17 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore no longer assigned to the case. Signed by the Executive Committee on February 11, 2013. (cjl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/11/2013) (Entered: 02/11/2013)
18 NOTICE of Related Case: C−12−3885−CRB, filed by Wal−Mart Stores Inc. (Earnest, Mark) (Filed on 2/12/2013) Modified on 2/13/2013 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Modified on 2/13/2013 (jlm, COURT STAFF). Modified on 2/13/2013 (jlm, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/12/2013)
19 Certificate of Interested Entities by George Partida (Mehrban, Julie) (Filed on 2/21/2013) (Entered: 02/21/2013)
20 NOTICE of Pendency of Other Action or Proceeding, filed by George Partida (Mehrban, Julie) (Filed on 2/21/2013) Modified on 2/22/2013 (jlm, COURT STAFF). (Entered: 02/21/2013)
21 ORDER RELATING CASE C−13−0305YGR to C−12−3885CRB. Counsel are instructed that all future filings in any reassigned case are to bear the initials of the newly assigned judge immediately after the case number. Any dates for hearing noticed motions are vacated and must be re−noticed by the moving party before the newly assigned judge. Signed by Judge Charles R. Breyer on 3/7/2013. (beS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/8/2013) (Entered: 03/08/2013)
22 ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Hon. Charles R. Breyer for all further proceedings. Judge Hon. Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers no longer assigned to the case. Related cases: Create association to 3:12−cv−03885−CRB. Signed by The Executive Committee, on 03/11/2013. (jlm, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/11/2013) (Entered: 03/11/2013)
23 ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES C−12−3885 CRB &C−13−0305 CRB by Hon. Charles R. Breyer re (18) Motion to Consolidate Cases 3:13−cv−00305−CRB(tlS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/3/2013). DRA,DREDF and Lewis Feingber Interim Class Counsel. (Entered: 04/03/2013)