Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-01161/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-01161-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Benefits

---

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

1

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DISTRIBUTORS ASSOCIATION

WAREHOUSEMEN’S PENSION

TRUST AND, et al.,

 Plaintiffs,

 v.

FOREIGN TRADE ZONE 3, INC., 

 Defendant.

_____________________________/

No. C-05-1161 SBA (WDB)

ORDER FOR SUPPLEMENTAL

INFORMATION RE PLAINTIFFS'

MOTION FOR DEFAULT

JUDGMENT

On November 7, 2005, the court conducted a hearing in connection with

plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment. As stated on the record, the court

requested supplemental briefing with respect to the following issues. 

By Friday, November 18, 2005, plaintiffs must file with the court and

serve on defendant supplemental submissions addressing the following issues.

1. Plaintiffs’s counsel confirmed on the record that monthly

contributions are “due” on the last day of the month following the month in which

the covered employees completed the covered work. The governing collective

bargaining agreement states that the employer is deemed “delinquent” “on the

thirtieth [30th] day after any payment is due.” McKenzie Decl., at Ex. A (§ 9.05)

emphasis added. As written, the CBA indicates that an employer is not

“delinquent” until thirty days after the last day of the month following the month

Case 4:05-cv-01161-SBA Document 48 Filed 11/07/05 Page 1 of 4
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

2

in which the covered employees completed the covered work. Under this

interpretation of the CBA, contributions for work conducted in August would be

due September 30th. However, if the employer paid those contributions at any

time before October 30th the employer would not be “delinquent” and therefore

would not be subject to liquidated damages.

Plaintiffs’ counsel represented that it is their understanding that the CBA, as

written, does not accurately capture the terms actually followed by the parties. 

Plaintiffs contend that contributions are delinquent on the first day after the last

day of the month following the month in which the covered employees completed

the covered work. Under this scenario, contributions for work conducted in

August would be delinquent if unpaid on October 1st. Plaintiffs must confirm that

this is their actual understanding about the terms of the CBA and that the parties

have been operating pursuant to this interpretation since the inception of the CBA.

2. Plaintiffs will set forth the bases for their position that defendant

remains bound by the terms of the CBA despite the fact that he has been kicked

out of IEDA.

3. Plaintiffs will submit evidence that the parties to the CBA made a

good faith effort to forecast the amount of damages that would be occasioned by

an employer’s failure to pay contributions in a timely manner when the parties

determined the applicable liquidated damages rates.

4. Plaintiffs’ counsel stated on the record that interest on delinquent

contributions did not begin running until plaintiffs filed their lawsuit. Plaintiffs

will confirm that the interest calculation plaintiffs submitted to the court does not

begin charging interest until the date the lawsuit was filed.

5. Plaintiffs may submit supplemental information in support of their

request that certain attorneys’ time be awarded at the rates of $425/hour and

$300/hour. 

Case 4:05-cv-01161-SBA Document 48 Filed 11/07/05 Page 2 of 4
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

3

6. Plaintiffs agreed to reduce the rate at which they billed for paralegal

time from $125/hour to $95/hour.

7. Plaintiffs will explain the billing entries by Mr. Schwartz described as

“draft answers” and “draft answer.” See Chavkin Decl., at Ex. C (entries for

3/14/05 and 3/15/05).

8. Plaintiffs will identify those costs incurred in connection with their 

motion to strike, (e.g., costs for photocopies, postage, filing costs).

9. Plaintiffs will explain the following costs: “Attorney’s Diversified

Services for filing documents with Court” and “Overnight delivery expense.”

10. If plaintiffs choose to pursue post-judgment interest at this juncture

they must submit legal authority establishing that they are entitled to such interest

and legal authority supporting the rate at which such interest accrues.

11. Plaintiffs must identify the provision in the CBA that entitles

plaintiffs to obtain an audit.

12. Plaintiffs seek an order compelling defendant to post a bond. 

Counsel for plaintiffs indicated that defendant has received notice that plaintiffs is

seeking such an order in this action. Plaintiffs have not, however, submitted

evidence that would support a finding that plaintiffs have submitted a “written

notice to [defendant] requesting the posting of such a bond.” McKenzie Decl., at

Ex. A (§9.08). Pursuant to the CBA, defendant has five days following such a

notice in which to comply.

Plaintiffs must submit evidence that they sent defendant a notice requesting

that it post a bond. 

If plaintiffs have not made a written request directly to defendant directing

it to post a bond and plaintiffs continue to seek an order from this Court

compelling defendant to post such a bond, then plaintiffs must immediately deliver

to defendant a written notice directing it to post such a bond within five days in

Case 4:05-cv-01161-SBA Document 48 Filed 11/07/05 Page 3 of 4
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

4

compliance with §9.08 of the CBA. In their November 18th submissions plaintiffs

must state whether the five days has elapsed and if so whether defendant has

complied.

The Court ORDERS plaintiffs to serve a copy of this order on

defendants immediately.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 7, 2005

/s/ Wayne D. Brazil 

WAYNE D. BRAZIL

United States Magistrate Judge

Copies to: 

Plaintiffs with direction to serve defendant, 

SBA, wdb, stats

Case 4:05-cv-01161-SBA Document 48 Filed 11/07/05 Page 4 of 4