Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01285/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-01285-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 05:704 Labor Litigation

---

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 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

JEFFRY LEVIN, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CAVIAR, INC., 

Defendant. 

Case No. 15-cv-01285-EDL 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE 

This is a putative wage and hour class action brought by restaurant delivery drivers against 

Defendant Caviar, Inc. This Court previously granted a motion to compel arbitration of Plaintiff’s 

individual claims, held that the class action waiver was enforceable but the California Private 

Attorneys General Act of 2004, Cal. Lab.Code, § 2698 et seq. (“PAGA”) waiver was not, and 

ultimately ordered the parties to arbitrate the issue of the arbitrability of the PAGA claims. Dkt. 

Nos. 43. The Court stayed the case pending the arbitrator’s decision on the question of whether 

Plaintiff’s PAGA claim is arbitrable. Dkt. No. 49. 

On March 24, 2016, the parties filed a stipulation of dismissal with prejudice of Plaintiff’s 

PAGA claims because they have agreed that another Caviar courier will pursue these claims in 

arbitration. Dkt. No. 50. The parties did not ask the Court to either stay or dismiss the remainder 

of the case. 

This Court has the discretion to stay the case under 9 U.S.C. § 3 or dismiss the litigation 

entirely. See Sparling v. Hoffman Constr. Co., 864 F.2d 635, 638 (9th Cir.1988). On March 29, 

2016, the Court notified the parties that it was inclined to dismiss the entire case with prejudice 

and that any party who objected to dismissal of the case, or objected to dismissal with prejudice as 

opposed to without prejudice was required to file a brief of no more than three pages within one 

week of the date of the Court’s order explaining the reason for the objection. 

Case 3:15-cv-01285-EDL Document 53 Filed 05/02/16 Page 1 of 2
2 

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 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of Californi

a

No objections having been received, this Court now dismisses the action in its entirety with 

prejudice. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: May 2, 2016 

 

ELIZABETH D. LAPORTE 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:15-cv-01285-EDL Document 53 Filed 05/02/16 Page 2 of 2