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

Catherine Pearson, Esq. #023337

PEARSON LAW GROUP, LLC

9375 E. Shea Blvd., Suite 100

Scottsdale, Arizona 85260

Telephone: (602) 688-6680

Email: catherine@pearsonlg.com

Michelle G. Breit, Esq. #021439

BREIT LAW, P.C.

14300 N. Northsight Blvd., Suite 210

Scottsdale, Arizona 85260

Telephone (480) 336-2800

Email: mbreit@breitlawgroup.com

Attorneys for Defendants Gavin Hays

and Springboard Inc.,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

THOMAS HARMON, an individual; 

and APEX MEDICAL STAFFING 

LLC, a California limited liability 

company,

Plaintiffs,

v.

GAVIN HAYS and JANE DOE 

HAYS, a married couple; 

SPRINGBOARD, INC., an Arizona 

corporation; and various unknown 

and/or fictional individuals and 

entities,

Defendants.

Case No. _______________

NOTICE OF REMOVAL

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441(a) and 1446, and 

LRCiv 3.6, Defendants Springboard, Inc. and Gavin Hays (jointly “Defendants”) hereby 

remove to this Court an action pending in the Arizona Superior Court, Maricopa County 

(No. CV2017-014286).

Case 2:17-cv-04493-JJT Document 1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 1 of 4
-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

The grounds for removal are: 

1. On November 1, 2017, Plaintiffs Thomas Harmon and Apex Medical Staffing 

LLC filed an action in the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, Maricopa County, No. 

CV-2017-014286 (the “Action”). Plaintiffs served the Summons and Complaint on 

Defendants on November 6, 2017.

2. This Court has original jurisdiction over the Action as Plaintiffs allege 

Defendants violated §10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. § 78j(b)) 

and SEC Rule 10b-5 (17 C.F.R. § 240. 10b-5) based on allegations of material 

misrepresentations [Complaint ¶¶ 288-294 (Count Six)]. As provided by 15 U.S.C. §78aa 

(2010), “[t]he district courts of the United States and the United States Courts of any 

Territory or other place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States shall have exclusive 

jurisdiction of violations of this chapter or the rules and regulations thereunder....” See 

also, Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Epstein, 516 U.S. 367, 370 (1996) (15 U.S.C. §78aa 

“unequivocally confers exclusive jurisdiction upon the federal courts for suits brought to 

enforce the Act or rules and regulations promulgated thereunder”).

3. The Action may be removed to this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b), in that 

this Court has “original jurisdiction founded on a claim or right arising under the 

Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United States.” 

4. Further, this Notice of Removal is timely filed under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b), as 

Defendants first received the initial pleading on November 6, 2017, when the Complaint 

was served on Defendants.

5. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ remaining state law 

claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367, which provides that “district courts shall have 

supplemental jurisdiction over all other claims that are so related to claims in the action 

within such original jurisdiction that they form part of the same case or controversy.” 

Plaintiffs’ state law claims for breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith 

and fair dealing, breach of fiduciary duty, common law fraud, and violation of A.R.S. § 

44-1991(A) are sufficiently related to Plaintiffs’ claim under the Securities Exchange Act 

Case 2:17-cv-04493-JJT Document 1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 2 of 4
-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

of 1934 so as to form part of the same case or controversy. 

6. Defendants have served a copy of this Notice of Removal on Plaintiffs in 

accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d).

7. This Court is part of the district and division embracing the place where this 

Action was filed – Maricopa County, Arizona. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1441, 1446. Venue is proper 

in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391.

8. Pursuant to LRCiv 3.6(a), attached as Exhibit A hereto in the most recent 

version of the docket from the state court Action.

9. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a) and LRCiv 3.6(b), the undersigned counsel for 

Defendants verifies that true and complete copies of all pleadings and other documents 

filed in the state court proceeding are filed herewith as Exhibit B. 

10. Concurrently with the filing of this Notice, a copy of the Notice of Removal to 

Federal Court has been filed with Clerk of the Superior Court of Maricopa County in 

accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), and is attached hereto as Exhibit C.

11. This Notice is signed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 in 

accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a).

12. Based on the foregoing, Defendants hereby remove this action from Maricopa 

County Superior Court to this Court, and request that further proceedings be conducted in 

this Court. 

DATED this 4

th day of December 2017. 

By: s/ Michelle G. Breit

 Michelle G. Breit, Esq. #021439

BREIT LAW, P.C.

14300 N. Northsight Blvd., Suite 210

Scottsdale, Arizona 85260

Catherine M. Pearson

PEARSON LAW GROUP, LLC

9375 E. Shea Blvd., Suite 100

Scottsdale, Arizona 85260

Attorney for Defendants

Case 2:17-cv-04493-JJT Document 1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 3 of 4
-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

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 4

th day of December 2017, I electronically transmitted

the foregoing document to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and

transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing and via email to the following CM/ECF

registrants:

Chrstopher M. Goodman

LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTOPHER GOODMAN, PLC

45 W. Jefferson St., Suite 512

Phoenix, Arizona 85003

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

By: /s/ Donna Ross

Case 2:17-cv-04493-JJT Document 1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 4 of 4