Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01213/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01213-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Christian Brink
Plaintiff
Central Valley Auto Transport, Inc.
Defendant
David Maier
Plaintiff

Document Text:

JOINT STIPULATION RE LEAVE TO FILE SAC;

ORDER

1

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

David Mara, Esq. (SBN 230498)

Jill Vecchi, Esq. (SBN 299333)

MARA LAW FIRM, PC

2650 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 205

San Diego, California 92108

Telephone: (619) 234-2833

Facsimile: (619) 234-4048

Attorneys for Plaintiff CHRISTIAN BRINK 

on behalf of himself, all others similarly situated, 

and on behalf of the general public

David J. Cooper, Esq. (SBN 47615)

Vanessa Franco Chavez, Esq. (SBN 266724)

Mayra Estrada, Esq. (SBN 317178)

KLEIN DENATALE GOLDNER COOPER 

ROSENLIEB KIMBALL LLP

4550 California Avenue, 2nd Floor

Bakersfield, California 93309

Telephone: 661.395.1000

Facsimile: 661.326.0418 

Attorneys for Defendant CENTRAL 

VALLEY AUTO TRANSPORT, INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, FRESNO DIVISION

CHRISTIAN BRINK and DAVID 

MAIER, on behalf of themselves, all 

others similarly situated, and on behalf 

of the general public,

Plaintiff, 

v.

CENTRAL VALLEY AUTO 

TRANSPORT; and DOES 1-100,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:19-cv-01213-AWI-SKO

STIPULATION REQUESTING LEAVE TO 

FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT; 

ORDER

(Doc. 8)

Action Filed: June 6, 2018

Trial Date: None Set

Case 1:19-cv-01213-AWI-SKO Document 9 Filed 01/29/20 Page 1 of 5
JOINT STIPULATION RE LEAVE TO FILE SAC;

ORDER

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

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

Plaintiffs Christian Brink and David Maier (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendant Central Valley 

Auto Transport, Inc. (“Defendant”) by and through their respective counsel of record, hereby enter 

into the stipulation below with reference to the following facts:

WHEREAS, on June 6, 2018, Plaintiff Brink filed a Class Action Complaint in the 

Superior Court of the State of California, County of Tulare (Case No. VCU274266);

WHEREAS, on August 14, 2018, Defendant filed an Answer to Plaintiff’s Class Action 

Complaint;

WHEREAS, on December 13, 2018, Plaintiff Brink filed a First Amended Complaint, 

adding Plaintiff Maier and a cause of action for violations of the Private Attorneys General Act of 

2004;

WHEREAS, while in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Tulare the 

Parties met and conferred regarding a stipulation to file a Second Amended Complaint, which 

would add claims for reimbursements and misclassification, dismiss the claims for overtime and 

recovery periods, and add a class and subclasses consistent with the additional claims;

WHEREAS, the Parties filed a stipulation to file a Second Amended Complaint on August 

22, 2019;

WHEREAS, based upon the proposed Second Amended Complaint attached to the 

stipulation, Defendant removed the action to this Court, on August 30, 2019, under the Class 

Action Fairness Act of 2005, alleging, among other things, that the majority of the newly alleged 

Misclassification Class are residents of states other than California;

WHEREAS, the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Tulare did not rule 

on the Parties’ stipulation prior to Defendant removing the case and, therefore, the Second 

Amended Complaint was never filed;

WHEREAS, the number of putative Misclassification Class members who are residents 

of states other than California directly impacts the jurisdiction of this Court;

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs believe obtaining the contact information for the putative 

Case 1:19-cv-01213-AWI-SKO Document 9 Filed 01/29/20 Page 2 of 5
JOINT STIPULATION RE LEAVE TO FILE SAC;

ORDER

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

Misclassification Class members will aid them in evaluating this Court’s jurisdiction;

WHEREAS, Defendant has agreed to provide Plaintiffs with the contact information for 

the putative class members after engaging in a Belaire West notice process;

WHEREAS, the Belaire West notice will need to be sent to individuals who fall under the 

class definition in the Second Amended Complaint, as that class definition was used in Defendant’s 

notice of removal;

WHEREAS, the Parties believe that the Second Amended Complaint should be filed 

before the Belaire West notices are mailed;

WHEREAS, through this stipulation and/or the filing of the Second Amended Complaint, 

Plaintiffs do not concede this Court’s jurisdiction and reserve their right to challenge jurisdiction;

WHEREAS, Defendant’s signing of this stipulation shall not constitute an admission of 

any of the allegations set forth in the Second Amended Complaint; 

WHEREAS, Defendant reserves its right to raise any and all affirmative defenses 

(substantive or procedural) and this stipulation shall not be deemed a waiver of any affirmative 

defenses or of any other legal or factual position in connection the alleged claims in this suit or in 

connection with Plaintiff’s filing of the Second Amended Complaint, including but not limited to 

Defendant’s right to challenge the Second Amended Complaint by filing a motion to dismiss, 

motion to strike, motion for judgment on the pleadings, motion for summary judgment or 

adjudication; 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby stipulate to and respectfully request the Court 

grant Plaintiffs leave to file their Second Amended Complaint. A copy of the Second Amended 

Complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit A. A redline edit of the Second Amended Complaint is 

attached hereto as Exhibit B. 

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED that Defendant shall have thirty (30) days following the 

filing and service of the Second Amended Complaint to file its responsive pleading.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

/ / /

Case 1:19-cv-01213-AWI-SKO Document 9 Filed 01/29/20 Page 3 of 5
JOINT STIPULATION RE LEAVE TO FILE SAC;

ORDER

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

Dated: January 28, 2020 MARA LAW FIRM, PC

 /s/ Jill Vecchi

 David Mara, Esq.

 Jill Vecchi, Esq.

Attorneys for Plaintiff CHRISTIAN BRINK 

on behalf of himself, all others similarly situated, 

and on behalf of the general public

Dated: January 28, 2020 KLEIN DENATALE GOLDNER COOPER 

 ROSENLIEB KIMBALL LLP

 /s/ Vanessa Franco Chavez

 Vanessa Franco Chavez, Esq.

Attorneys for Defendant CENTRAL VALLEY 

AUTO TRANSPORT, INC. 

Pursuant to Local Rule 5-4.3.4(a)(2)(i), I attest that all other signatories listed, and on whose behalf 

the filing is submitted, concur in the filing’s content and have authorized the filing.

_/s/_Jill Vecchi___________________

Jill Vecchi, Esq.

Case 1:19-cv-01213-AWI-SKO Document 9 Filed 01/29/20 Page 4 of 5
JOINT STIPULATION RE LEAVE TO FILE SAC;

ORDER

5

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

ORDER

Based on the parties’ above-stipulation (Doc. 8), IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 

Plaintiffs are granted leave to file their Second Amended Complaint through ECF within ten (10) 

business days of this Order. Service on Defendant of the Second Amended Complaint shall be 

deemed effective when the Second Amended Complaint is filed and served through ECF. 

Defendant shall have thirty (30) days following the filing and service of the Second Amended 

Complaint to file its responsive pleading.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 29, 2020 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-01213-AWI-SKO Document 9 Filed 01/29/20 Page 5 of 5