Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02472/USCOURTS-caed-2_13-cv-02472-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

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

[PROPOSED] SUMMARY OF ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF

DANISHA HARRIS’ MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANTS CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL SERVICE CO.,

LLC AND CHIPOTLE SERVICES, LLC TO PROVIDE FURTHER RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S

INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE) 

LAWYERS for JUSTICE, PC 

410 West Arden Avenue, Suite 203 

Glendale, California 91203 

Edwin Aiwazian (Cal. State Bar No. 232943) 

edwin@lfjpc.com

Arby Aiwazian (Cal. State Bar No. 269827) 

arby@lfjpc.com

Jill J. Parker (Cal. State Bar No. 274230) 

jill@lfjpc.com 

LAWYERS for JUSTICE, PC 

410 West Arden Avenue, Suite 203 

Glendale, California 91203 

Telephone: (818) 265-1020

Facsimile: (818) 265-1021

[Additional List of Counsel Continued on Next Page] 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DANISHA HARRIS; ANTANISHA WILEY; 

DEONTÉ MASK; JASON RYAN; 

individually, and on behalf of other members 

of the general public similarly situated, 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL, INC., a 

Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 

10, inclusive, 

 Defendants. 

Case No. 2:13-CV-02472-WBS-EFB 

Honorable Edmund F. Brennan 

Courtroom 8 

CLASS ACTION 

[PROPOSED] AMENDED SUMMARY

OF ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND

DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF

DANISHA HARRIS’ MOTION TO

COMPEL DEFENDANTS CHIPOTLE

MEXICAN GRILL SERVICE CO., LLC

AND CHIPOTLE SERVICES, LLC TO

PROVIDE FURTHER RESPONSES TO

PLAINTIFF’S INTERROGATORIES

(SET ONE)

Case 2:13-cv-02472-WBS-EFB Document 49 Filed 11/17/14 Page 1 of 3
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

 

 [PROPOSED] SUMMARY OF ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF

DANISHA HARRIS’ MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANTS CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL SERVICE CO.,

LLC AND CHIPOTLE SERVICES, LLC TO PROVIDE FURTHER RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S

INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE) 

LAWYERS for JUSTICE, PC 

410 West Arden Avenue, Suite 203 

Glendale, California 91203 

R. Rex Parris (Cal. State Bar No. 96567) 

rrparris@rrexparris.com 

Alexander R. Wheeler (Cal. State Bar No. 239541)

awheeler@rrexparris.com 

Kitty K. Szeto (Cal. State Bar No. 258136) 

kszeto@rrexparris.com 

R. R E X P A R R I S L A W F I R M 

43364 10TH Street West 

Lancaster, California 93534 

Telephone: (661) 949-2595

Facsimile: (661) 949-7524

Case 2:13-cv-02472-WBS-EFB Document 49 Filed 11/17/14 Page 2 of 3
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 

 [PROPOSED] SUMMARY OF ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF

DANISHA HARRIS’ MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANTS CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL SERVICE CO.,

LLC AND CHIPOTLE SERVICES, LLC TO PROVIDE FURTHER RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF’S

INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE) 

LAWYERS for JUSTICE, PC 

410 West Arden Avenue, Suite 203 

Glendale, California 91203 

[PROPOSED] SUMMARY OF ORDER 

Plaintiff Danisha Harris’ (“Plaintiff”) Motion to Compel Defendants Chipotle Mexican 

Grill Service Co., LLC and Chipotle Services, LLC (“Defendants”) to Provide Further 

Responses to Plaintiff’s Special Interrogatories (Set One) came on for hearing on 

November 5, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. in the above-entitled court. Jill J. Parker appeared for Plaintiff. 

Danielle T. Felder and Jason W. Kearnaghan appeared for Defendants. After consideration of all 

the papers filed in connection with Plaintiff’s motion, and all other matters presented to the 

Court, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. Plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses to Interrogatories Nos. 2, 5, 8, 

and 9 is granted. In connection with the production of the contact information 

for the putative class of non-Hispanic employees, Counsel for the parties shall 

meet and confer regarding the preparation of an opt-out notice. The parties 

shall submit their draft opt-out notice to the Court for approval. In the event 

the parties disagree regarding the content of the opt-out notice, the parties 

shall so inform the Court. The parties shall also meet and confer regarding 

sampling for the opt-out notice and putative class data production, as well as 

the preparation of a protective order that shall be operative in this matter. 

2. Plaintiff’s motion to compel further responses to Interrogatories Nos. 3, 4, 6, 

7, and 10 is denied, subject to the requirement that Defendants provide 

verified responses stating that they do not have any information in their 

possession, custody, or control, regarding the race, color, ethnicity, or national 

origin of any applicant who was never employed by any of the Defendants. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: November 17, 2014. 

 ______________________________ 

Honorable Edmund F. Brennan 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:13-cv-02472-WBS-EFB Document 49 Filed 11/17/14 Page 3 of 3