Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-04969/USCOURTS-cand-5_09-cv-04969-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:201 Denial of Overtime Compensation

---

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

Sandoval, et al v. AB Landscaping Inc., et al 1 Case No. C09-4969 HRL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

ADAM WANG, Bar No. 201233

ADAM PEDERSEN, Bar No. 261901

LAW OFFICES OF ADAM WANG

12 S First Street, Suite 708

San Jose, CA 95113

Tel: 408-292-1040

Fax: 408-416-0248

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Luis Sandoval, Israel Rodriguez and Ricardo Jimenez

ROGER M. MASON, ESQ. (107486)

CAITLIN E. KAUFMAN, ESQ. (238424)

SWEENEY, MASON, WILSON & BOSOMWORTH

983 University Avenue, Suite 104C

Los Gatos, CA 95032-7637

408-356-3000 phone

408-354-8839 fax

ckaufman@smwb.com

Attorneys for Defendants 

AB Landscaping, Inc. and Victor Arellano

UNITED STATES FEDERAL COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

LUIS SANDOVAL, ISRAEL RODRIGUEZ, 

AND RICARDO JIMENEZ, in behalf of 

themselves and similarly situated, 

Plaintiffs,

vs.

AB LANDSCAPING, INC. AND VICTOR 

ARELLANO,

Defendants

Case No.: 

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE INITIAL 

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

Parties by and through their respective counsel, stipulate to continue the initial case 

management conference for 60 days as follows: 

** E-Filed February 25, 2010 **

Case 5:09-cv-04969-HRL Document 8 Filed 02/25/10 Page 1 of 3
 

 

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

Sandoval, et al v. AB Landscaping Inc., et al 2 Case No. C09-4969 HRL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1. Plaintiffs filed this case on October 19, 2009, alleging unpaid overtime and other 

violations under both California Labor Code and Fair Labor Standards Act. The Summons and 

Complaint were served on January 25, 2010. 

2. Pursuant to California Labor Code Private Attorney General’s Act § 2699(c), 

Plaintiffs sent a notice to California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (“LWDA”) of 

the overtime violation, intending to bring the action to recover unpaid overtime on behalf of all 

employees former and current under Labor Code § 558. 

3. Attempting to avail themselves of the provision of Labor Code (“PAGA”) §

2699(c)(2)(A), Defendants took actions allegedly to cure the violation, by conducting an audit 

and issuing payment to all employees the amount Defendants claim to be owing in unpaid 

overtime. Plaintiffs claim that the Defendants’ methodology in audit is flawed, and not all 

overtime hours worked have been accounted for. As such, Plaintiffs plan to dispute that 

Defendants have cured the overtime violations according to the procedure provided for under 

Labor Code § 2699(c)(2)(B). 

4. Until LWDA makes its decision whether or not the overtime violations have been 

fully cured, Plaintiffs may not proceed to file the cause of action under PAGA to recover the 

overtime owed on behalf of all employees. 

5. As such, parties stipulate to request a 60-day continuance for Initial Case 

Management Conference currently set for March 2, 2010 and ask that the corresponding 

discovery deadlines to be continued accordingly.

///

///

///

///

///

///

Case 5:09-cv-04969-HRL Document 8 Filed 02/25/10 Page 2 of 3
 

 

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 

Sandoval, et al v. AB Landscaping Inc., et al 3 Case No. C09-4969 HRL

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

6. Regardless of the outcome of the LWDA determination, Plaintiffs expect to file a 

First Amended Complaint to add another Plaintiff and potentially amend one or more of the 

causes of action therein. For this reason, Plaintiffs and Defendants stipulate and agree that 

Defendants’ response to the Complaint be extended until 20 days after a First Amended 

Complaint is served.

Respectfully submitted, 

Dated: February 23, 2010

By: /s/ Adam Wang 

ADAM WANG 

Attorney for Plaintiffs

Dated: February 23, 2010 By: /s/ Caitlin E. Kaufman

CAITLIN E. KAUFMAN

SWEENEY, MASON, WILSON &

BOSOMWORTH

Attorneys for Defendants. 

______________________________________________

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, IT IS HEREBY 

ORDERED the Initial Case Management Conference be continued to _______________, 2010. 

The ADR Certification is due on ________________, 2010. The Stipulation and Order 

Selecting ADR Process is due on ________________, 2010. The Rule 26(f) Report, Initial 

Disclosures, and Joint Case Management Statement are due on _____________, 2010. 

Dated: February ___, 2010 By: ___________________

Howard L. Lloyd

US Magistrate Judge

May 4

April 27 April 13 April 13 25

Case 5:09-cv-04969-HRL Document 8 Filed 02/25/10 Page 3 of 3