Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00169/USCOURTS-caed-1_20-cv-00169-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CROSS-DEFENDANT 

LETICIA PINEDA TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 

COUNTY OF FRESNO

LETICIA PINEDA, on behalf of herself and 

all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

vs.

SUN VALLEY PACKING, L.P.; and DOES 

1-10,

Defendants.

Case No.: 1:20-cv-00169-DAD-EPG

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR 

EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CROSSDEFENDANT LETICIA PINEDA TO 

FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING (L. R. 

144; FRCP 6)

SUN VALLEY PACKING, L.P.

Cross-Complainant,

vs.

LETICIA PINEDA, on behalf of herself and 

all others similarly situated,

Cross-Defendants.

Case 1:20-cv-00169-ADA-EPG Document 10 Filed 03/05/20 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 1

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CROSS-DEFENDANT 

LETICIA PINEDA TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING

STIPULATION

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 144, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant 

Leticia Pineda, by and through her attorneys of record, and Defendant and Cross-Complainant 

Sun Valley Packing, L.P., by and through its attorneys of record, hereby stipulate to an extension 

as follows:

1. On October 23, 2019, Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant Leticia Pineda (“Pineda”) 

filed a putative class action complaint in Fresno County Superior Court (Case No. 

19CECG03846) and amended the complaint in state court to add a claim under California’s 

Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”) (the “FAC”). Plaintiff served the FAC on Defendant 

and Cross-Complainant Sun Valley Packing, L.P. (“Sun Valley”) on January 29, 2020.

2. On January 31, 2020, Sun Valley filed a Notice of Removal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

1332, 1441, and 1446 in the Eastern District of California (Case No. 1:20-cv-00169-DAD-EPG). 

(See Dkt. 1.) On the same date, Sun Valley filed a Cross-Complaint for Injunctive and

Declaratory Relief Regarding Unconstitutionality of PAGA. (See Dkt. #2.)

3. Pineda currently must file her responsive pleading to the Cross-Complaint by 

February 21, 2020.

4. On February 5, 2020, counsel for Pineda met and conferred in compliance with 

Eastern District of California Local Rule 144 and this Court’s Standing Order in Civil Action

regarding Pineda’s intent to file a Motion to Dismiss pursuant to FRCP 12(b) and/or a Motion for 

More Definite Statement pursuant to FRCP 12(e), as well as a motion arising from CrossComplainant’s failure to name an indispensable party.

5. During the meet and confer process, counsel for Sun Valley informed counsel for 

Pineda that Sun Valley will file an Amended Cross-Complaint to address the issues raised in the 

meet and confer process; however, counsel for Sun Valley is unable to amend the CrossComplaint before the February 21, 2020 deadline for Pineda to respond and file her anticipated 

motions.

Case 1:20-cv-00169-ADA-EPG Document 10 Filed 03/05/20 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 2

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CROSS-DEFENDANT 

LETICIA PINEDA TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING

6. To allow Sun Valley ample time to file its Amended Cross-Complaint, the parties 

wish to extend Pineda’s time to respond to the currently filed Cross-Complaint.

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED, by and between all parties 

through their respective counsel of record that:

1. Cross-Defendant Pineda’s date to answer or otherwise respond to Cross-Complainant 

Sun Valley’s Cross-Complaint is extended by 21 days to March 13, 2020;

2. If Cross-Complainant so chooses, Cross-Complainant may file an amended CrossComplaint on or before March 6, 2020. If the amended Cross-Complaint is filed, 

Cross-Defendant Pineda’s time to answer or otherwise respond to the amended 

complaint will be in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(3) – namely, 14 days after 

service of the amended pleading.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: February 18, 2020 MOSS BOLLINGER LLP

By:_____/s/________________________________

Jeremy F. Bollinger

Dennis F. Moss

Attorneys for Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant 

 LETICIA PINEDA

Dated: February 18, 2020 CAMPAGNE & CAMPAGNE

By:_______/s/______________________________

Thomas E. Campagne

Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Complainant

SUN VALLEY PACKING, L.P.

Case 1:20-cv-00169-ADA-EPG Document 10 Filed 03/05/20 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 3

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CROSS-DEFENDANT 

LETICIA PINEDA TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADING

ORDER

Pursuant to the above stipulation, which the Court finds good cause to approve, IT IS 

ORDERED that (1) Cross-Defendant Pineda’s date to answer or otherwise respond to CrossComplainant Sun Valley’s Cross-Complaint is extended by 21 days to March 13, 2020; and (2) if 

Cross-Complainant so chooses, Cross-Complainant may file an amended Cross-Complaint on or 

before March 6, 2020. If the amended Cross-Complaint is filed, Cross-Defendant Pineda’s time 

to answer or otherwise respond to the amended complaint will be in accordance with Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 15(a)(3)—namely, 14 days after service of the amended pleading.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 4, 2020 /s/

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-00169-ADA-EPG Document 10 Filed 03/05/20 Page 4 of 4