text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
July 13, 2010
CHRISTOPHER CAMPANELLA, PLAINTIFF,v.BAC HOME LOANS SERVICE, LP, DEFENDANT.
DECISION and ORDER
Currently before the Court, in this pro se action filed by Christopher Campanella ("Plaintiff") against BAC Home Loans Service, LP ("Defendant") arising out of a real property foreclosure dispute, is Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction precluding Defendant from foreclosing on Plaintiff's real property. (Dkt. No. 2.) For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiff's motion is denied.
Generally, in his Complaint, Plaintiff asserts against Defendant claims of breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, fraud, intentional infliction of emotional distress, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and violation of the Truth in Lending Act, arising out of Defendant's conduct in allegedly (1) colluding with others to induce him to enter into a predatory contract, on June 5, 2008, for the refinancing of his primary residence, in Valley Falls, New York, (2) failing to give proper notices to him, (3) charging him false loan settlement fees, and (4) instituting frivolous collection procedures against him. (See generally Dkt. No. 1.) For a more complete recitation of Plaintiff's claims, and the factual allegations supporting them, the reader is referred to Plaintiff's Complaint in its entirety. (Id.)
A preliminary injunction is an "extraordinary remedy that should not be granted as a routine matter." Patton v. Dole, 806 F.2d 24, 28 (2d Cir. 1986). In most cases, to warrant the issuance of a preliminary injunction, a movant must show (a) irreparable harm and (b) either (1) a likelihood of success on the merits of the claim or (2) sufficiently serious questions going to the merits, and a balance of hardships tipping decidedly in favor of the moving party. D.D. ex rel. V.D. v. New York City Bd. of Educ., 465 F.3d 503, 510 (2d Cir. 2006) (quotation omitted).
"Irreparable harm is the single most important prerequisite for the issuance of a preliminary injunction," and . . ., accordingly, "the moving party must first demonstrate that such injury is likely before the other requirements for the issuance of an injunction will be considered." Grand River Enter. Six Nations, Ltd. v. Pryor, 481 F.3d 60, 66-67 (2d Cir. 2007).
"The Second Circuit has defined 'irreparable harm' as 'certain and imminent harm for which a monetary award does not adequately compensate,' noting that 'only harm shown to be non-compensable in terms of money damages provides the basis for awarding injunctive relief.'" Perri v. Bloomberg, 06-CV-0403, 2008 WL 2944642, at * 2 (E.D.N.Y. Jul. 31, 2008) (citing Wisdom Import Sales Co., L.L.C. v. Labatt Brewing Co., Ltd., 339 F.3d 101, 113-14 [2d Cir. 2003]).*fn1 Additionally, irreparable harm "must be shown to be actual and imminent, not remote or speculative." Kamerling, 295 F.3d at 214.
Based on the papers currently before the Court, Plaintiff's request for injunctive relief is too speculative to meet the irreparable harm requirement. On June 11, 2010 (the date on which he signed and filed both his Complaint and his motion papers), Plaintiff anachronistically asserted that the scheduled date of the allegedly imminent sale was "Wednesday, June 9, 2010"--two days before the filing of the Complaint and motion papers. (Dkt. No. 2, Attach. 2, at 2 [Plf.'s Affid.].) No other "imminent" sale date was given in either his Complaint or motion papers. (Dkt. Nos. 1, 2.)
One possible explanation for this temporal impossibility is that Plaintiff made an error in his haste to file three separate actions on June 11, 2010 (the other two pending before United States District Judge Lawrence E. Kahn of this Court, and relating to another lending institution's foreclosure of two other real properties owned by Plaintiff). This explanation is plausible given that the scheduled sale date asserted in those other two actions was also Wednesday, June 9, 2010--an unexplained coincidence that strains credulity.*fn2
The problem is that, even if the Court were to assume that Plaintiff meant to assert that the sale was to occur at some point in the following month, he has failed to submit sufficient proof or evidence to persuade the Court of that fact.*fn3 Of course, conclusory allegations of imminent harm, standing alone, are not sufficient to entitle a movant to preliminary injunctive relief. See Ivy Mar Co. v. C.R. Seasons Ltd., 907 F. Supp. 547, 561 (E.D.N.Y. 1995) ("[B]are allegations, without more, are insufficient for the issuance of a preliminary injunction."); Hancock v. Essential Resources, Inc., 792 F. Supp. 924, 928 (S.D.N.Y. 1992) ("Preliminary injunctive relief cannot rest on mere hypotheticals.").
Finally, even if Plaintiff had submitted sufficientproof or evidence to persuade the Court of the imminent nature of the sale, the Court would deny Plaintiff's motion because Defendant has not yet answered Plaintiff's Complaint, and the Court cannot ascertain Plaintiff's likelihood of success on the merits of the claim (or whether sufficiently serious questions exist going to those merits, along with a balance of hardships tipping decidedly in favor of Plaintiff).
For each of the alternative reasons set forth above, Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction is denied without prejudice
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction (Dkt. No. 2) is DENIED without prejudice.
Syracuse, New York.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
School leader search narrowsApril 02,2013WINOOSKI The principal of Champlain Valley Union High School in Hinesburg is the finalist in the search for a new superintendent of schools in Winooski.
Sean McMannon will meet with teachers, parents, students and the Winooski School Board on Thursday.
Another finalist was picked and scheduled to meet the school community but dropped out of the running last week.
Yutaka Tamura, the lead founder of Excel Academy, a Boston charter school serving mostly minority and low-income students, told the Burlington Free Press that he decided to stay at Exel Academy.
The Winooski School Board is expected to decide on Thursday night whether to hire McMannon or to renew the search.MORE IN Vermont NewsMONTPELIER Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt. Full StoryVermont Attorney General Bill Sorrell plans to join the U.S. Full StoryMONTPELIER Gov. Full Story
- Most Popular
- Most Emailed

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Royal Ascot and Cliveden - Masters of the Horse and Mastery of the Turf
Ascot, Windsor and Maidenhead, England, United Kingdom
Meet new people, enjoy Eliza's adventures and learn a little more about how a day at the races can be a fantastic day...
People: Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh and Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom
Pictured: Royal couple's grandparents' jet-age meeting - Telegraph
Forgotten footage shot by British Pathé reveals the moment that Kate Middleton's grandfather crossed paths ...
People: Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge, Peter Francis Middleton and 1 other.
Ancestry Family Trees
People: Geroge St. Myers, Lt. William Clarke, of Northampton, Rev. Dr. John Clarke, of Newport and 989 others.
People: Ine, king of Wessex, Marjorie Bruce, Princess of Scotland, Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom and 2645 others.


text:
*** 475 Week * ** *
Attached: HCS 475 Week 1 DQ 2.zip
$5.19Buy an answer
This work of HCS 475 Week 1 Discussion Question 2 comprises:
How is a leader different than a manager? What are the traits of an effective leader? What are the traits of an effective manager? Be sure to identify specific, real-world examples.
$5.19Buy an answer
Sign In to Your Account
Create Account
Thank you for registration!
Thank you for registration!
You password was sent to your email address !


text:
The stock of Loblaw Companies Limited (TSE:L) is a huge mover today! About 146,438 shares traded hands. Loblaw Companies Limited (TSE:L) has declined 5.94% since March 14, 2016 and is downtrending. It has underperformed by 11.49% the S&P500.
The move comes after 9 months negative chart setup for the $26.99B company. It was reported on Oct, 19 by Barchart.com. We have $60.47 PT which if reached, will make TSE:L worth $2.43 billion less.
Loblaw Companies Limited (TSE:L) Ratings Coverage
Out of 8 analysts covering Loblaw Companies Limited (TSE:L), 5 rate it a "Buy", 0 "Sell", while 3 "Hold". This means 63% are positive. Loblaw Companies Limited has been the topic of 20 analyst reports since July 21, 2015 according to StockzIntelligence Inc. The stock has "Sector Perform" rating given by Scotia Capital on Thursday, September 22. The firm has "Neutral" rating by Dundee Securities given on Thursday, September 22. RBC Capital Markets downgraded the stock to "Sector Perform" rating in Thursday, November 19 report. The stock of Loblaw Companies Limited (TSE:L) earned "Sector Perform" rating by Scotia Capital on Wednesday, August 24.
More notable recent Loblaw Companies Limited (TSE:L) news were published by: Finance.Yahoo.com which released: "Loblaw Companies Limited completes acquisition of QHR Corporation" on October 13, 2016, also Finance.Yahoo.com with their article: "QHR Shareholders Approve Plan of Arrangement with Loblaw Companies Limited" published on October 05, 2016, Fool.ca published: "Is it Time to Abandon Loblaw Companies Limited?" on October 07, 2016. More interesting news about Loblaw Companies Limited (TSE:L) were released by: Business.Financialpost.com and their article: "Loblaw Companies Ltd shuts down last U.S. Joe Fresh outlet as it 're-evaluates …" published on June 02, 2016 as well as Business.Financialpost.com's news article titled: "Loblaw Companies Ltd says move to cut grocery prices in top-tier stores …" with publication date: July 27, 2016.
Loblaw Companies Limited is a Canada holding company. The company has a market cap of $26.99 billion. The Company, through its subsidiaries, provides grocery, pharmacy, health and beauty, apparel, general merchandise, and financial services and products. It has a 41.7 P/E ratio. The Firm operates through three divisions: Retail, Financial Services and Choice Properties.
Receive News & Ratings Via Email - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings with our FREE daily email newsletter.


text:
About "Emigración del Suave" by Twiggyhall
Emigración del Suave
Design by Twiggyhall
This swinger found the deluxe way to travel South this year!
Nice wheels! I'd travel with this tee anytime! $5
$5 - great colors!
needs to be higher on the shirt me thinks
This is one of your best designs so far Twigz in the way this really feels at home on the tee, like it was always on it. LOVe the little plaid hat and scarf, it really jumps out at you over the more cartoony affair. Very nice on many levels...great for the summer and the winter when we could all use some warming up. Great work! 4$
I like the plaid on his hat and scarfe. Really cute design.
Thank you everyone! :)
Yes, they're birds - the topic is migration, not what type of flying creatures are most likely to be found at any given time along route 66 - lol!
Besides, I'm pretty sure they have birds there, too :)
That's a fun idea, krazy4turtles!
If this guy gets printed, I'm sure Threadless can mess around with the placement and make sure it looks as groovy as possible :)
how stylish is this bird & such a great car...nice job!
Not a lot of comments on this in the last 2 days.
Guess I'm looking at another 1.78 or such...
Oh, that above comment makes a lot more sense now, lol
Hahaha - I was rather optimistic with that guess of 1.78!
oooh... This is Awesome!!! Print Pls!!
Haha, thanks!
lol @ 449 days!


text:
Contact details
Are these details correct?
Opening hours
Featured Message
Clothing & Shoe Stores, Fashion Accessory Store, Jewellery & Watches, Jewellery Shop, Shoe Shop
Is Michael Kors in 201 1 Avenue South 2B, Saskatoon SK S7K 1J9 your business? Claim your listing and attract more leads by adding more content, photos and other business details.
We have more Shoe Shop services in Saskatoon SK available on Hotfrog Canada. You can update your search for Saskatoon Shoe Shop by location, keyword or service options.
Saatoon170 Saatoon170 SASKATOON SASKATCHEWAN S7M 5B3
105 - 15 Innovation Blvd SASKATOON SASKATCHEWAN S7N 2X8
Rd Ave 366 3 SASKATOON SASKATCHEWAN S7M 1M5
Small Business Hub
Sharing tips, ideas and advice to help grow your small business
Your profile without ads
Have you considered upgrading to Hotfrog AdVantage? No competitor advertising means exclusive focus on your business. You take centre stage.
Create your free Hotfrog business profile
Follow Hotfrog on:
Share on:
Hotfrog Small Business Hub


text:
ROCK FOR FREEDOM 2016 charity event featured on LA's ABC7 News
Rock For Freedom 2016 was a big success!
Thank you to all of you who supported and helped! Big thanks to Monster Energy and Lucky Strike Live...we couldn't have done it without you. Thank you to All-Star Bowlers and Performers that donated their time to be there and make it such an unforgettable night. See photos and read more about the event HERE
View More Photos and Press from the event here
Rock For Freedom Headlined by Papa Roach
Over $18,000 raised to fight against human trafficking at the "Rock for Freedom 2016" event. All of the proceeds of the night go directly to the cause—fighting against sex trafficking.
Nikki Sixx Teams Up With Rockers United!
Nikki is one of the busiest men in music, but he is not too busy to care.
Our PSA is Featured on Major Festivals
Spreading the message at Northern Invasion Festival, Welcome to Rockville, Rock On The Range and more!
Human Trafficking In Orange County
A report being released Wednesday finds that eight new victims of human trafficking are identified in Orange County every month, on average. Read the full story.
Highlights From Our All-Star Fundraiser


text:
Derma Saver - Shin Tube
- Derma Savers skin tubes are loose fitting, plush, soft cotton-like fabric tubes that do not bunch up or drop. Designed for skin pressure relief they have thousands of micro-filaments per square cm to provide superior pressure and shear relief.
- The breathable fabric and filament layers allow air flow and moisture transfer.
- They can be machine washed and tumble dried at up to 95 degrees celsius and the anti-microbial will not support growth of bacteria.
- The stretchy knit (not woven) has 'give' to reduce surface friction.
- Latex free
Available in sizes from extra small to extra large. Measure around the widest part of the calf. Choose the larger size if measurement is between sizes.
X/Small: 18cm - 23cm
Small: 23cm - 30cm
Medium: 30cm - 38cm
Large: 38cm - 48cm
X/Large: 48cm - 58cm


text:
Super 8 San Lorenzo properties are listed below. Search for cheap and discount Super 8 hotel rooms in San Lorenzo, CA for your upcoming meeting or individual travels. We list the best Super 8 San Lorenzo hotels & lodging so you can review the San Lorenzo Super 8 hotel list below to find the perfect place.
Our website will also show you discounted San Lorenzo, CA lodging properties that have similar star quality of Super 8.Need 5+ Rooms? Get group bids from hotels in San Lorenzo CA
How should we direct your call?
With a stay at Super 8 Berkeley in Berkeley, you'll be near the bay and convenient to University of California - Berkeley and Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive.
With a stay at Super 8 Union Square San Francisco, you'll be centrally located in San Francisco, steps from Marrakech Magic Theater and minutes from Union Square.
With a stay at Super 8 San Francisco / Near the Marina in San Francisco (Marina District), you'll be convenient to Palace of Fine Arts and Lombard Street.
When you stay at Super 8 Mountain View in Mountain View, you'll be in the business district and close to Stevens Creek Trail and Computer History Museum.
When you stay at Super 8 Martinez in Martinez, you'll be convenient to Gone Fishing Guide Service.


text:
John is a handsome 6 month old Short Hair Buff with White Tabby neutered male kitten. He is friendly and loves pets and attention. He is extremely sweet and is also playful and will need a home where he will be played with on a regular basis. We rescued him and his brothers from being put down at another shelter, so we don't have any background on them. He would love to be adopted with his brothers, John, and Andrew, but it is not required. There is a discount for adopting more than one. He should O.K. around calm, cat-friendly children. He is young enough to be socialized to cat-friendly dogs who will also be gentle with him. Come meet this adorable bigger kitten (and his siblings) to see if you have the safe, lasting home he needs.
Angels with Paws does not receive any Government, Corporate or any regular funding. We do not have an on-site Veterinarian, and have to pay for our Veterinary Care and Supplies. Nearly all of our funding comes from private donations.
Our dream is to see the day when no adoptable animal will be euthanized.
Thank You!
Your message has been sent to Angels With Paws.
You'll receive a copy, too, at to help you keep track of which pets you've inquired about, and which shelters and rescues you've emailed.
NOTE: Some shelters have physical locations you can visit; some of these shelters may only have pets for a limited time, so please do not wait for a reply—just go visit the shelter! Other organizations are rescue groups run by busy volunteers who may take a while to reply. You can find information about the shelter or rescue group caring for this pet, and their adoption procedures, on the pet's details page on Adopt-a-Pet.com.


text:
Retail Price $239.98
Your Price $119.99
Gemstone Care
Jewelry Measurements
100% Satisfaction Guarantee
MATERIALS: Sterling silver and real Lapis.MEASUREMENTS: Pendant measures approximately 2" long (including bail) and 1-1/8" at widest point. Necklace measures approximately 17-7/8" long.DESCRIPTION:
Expect plenty of compliments while wearing this stunning necklace set! In this Native American jewelry set, the pendant is Navajo hand crafted by artist B. Benally, out of genuine sterling silver and real Lapis stones. A total of TWELVE stones are gently set in a hand cut bezel setting, while being accented by twisted silver and mini silver beads for an amazing look. The pendant is stamped sterling and hallmarked. The necklace is hand strung out of genuine sterling silver and real 6-mm Lapis round beads. Each end of the necklace is completed with a silver cone and bead for an exquisite finish. The cones are stamped sterling.
Lapis is the perfect stone for wisdom and fortitude. It is also believed to be an excellent stone for decision makers. It helps increase psychic ability.
SilverTribe.com is rated 4.9 out of 5 stars from 1239 reviews
Regular Price: $79.98
Regular Price: $69.98
Regular Price: $21.98
Regular Price: $3.98
Receive offers of up to 60% OFF when you become an Email VIP
Contact support here or call us at 1-888-659-2227


text:
The Meaning of LSMFT
You have found the definitive source for the meaning of LSMFT. This page contains all the definitions of LSMFT, crowd sourced, moderated and curated by real people who care about the true definitions of LSMFT.
The Top Definition of LSMFT
The most popular meaning of LSMFT is: Lucky Strike means Fine tobacco
What Other Meanings of LSMFT Are There?
There are no other definitions for LSMFT at this time. Add your own definition of LSMFT.
What is LSMFT?
LSMFT is Lucky Strike means Fine tobacco
LSMFT Means
The definition of LSMFT is "Lucky Strike means Fine tobacco".
LSMFT Definition
The meaning of LSMFT
LSMFT means Lucky Strike means Fine tobacco.
Now you understand the definition of LSMFT - LSMFT means "Lucky Strike means Fine tobacco".
We're glad to be of assistance. Click here to thank us:
What does LSMFT mean? LSMFT is an acronym, abbreviation or slang word that is explained above. If you ever forget what LSMFT means, just come back to Slang.org and we'll define any acronym you need help with.


text: It's always on...... I'll DVR + watch some of it......cos Cagney's dancing is SO GREAT ! And great songs ! "Yankee Doodle Dandy" on July 4th, is a tradition, like Christmas movies.... Charlie Brown's Halloween..........and "Vegas Vacation" - before every trip ! * MLB finally, brought back baseball day games for it, as well. * Do you know - last July 4th --- our town didn't start their fireworks til 10:20 pm ! It was really cold + windy, plus my 3 yr old son was falling asleep. I think they did it late so ALL the vendors could sell out their crap.


text:
Fiona (the landlady), Radish (the Jack Russell), Bean (the Hungarian vizsla/standard poodle) and Frogspawn - (the Shetland driving pony), and the rest of the team welcome you to the Hook and Glove in Farley. A friendly, happy little haven set in the beautiful village of Farley just 7 miles from Salisbury. We are a traditional, family and dog friendly free house with a log fire in the front snug bar and a woodburner in the restaurant in the winter and a beautiful fully fenced garden with panoramic views in the summer. We also have two petanque terrains (available free of charge but need booking), and space to tie up horses. There is a large car park at the rear and you are welcome to leave your car and wander off (there is a beautiful footpath starting in the pub garden going down towards the church and Hound Wood and another immediately opposite) to explore the beautiful surrounding countryside and the village (but please do just pop your head around the kitchen door to let us know you have left your car as the gate is locked for security reasons when we are not around).
We offer home cooked wholesome food, specialising in old fashioned home made pies, daily fresh fish (except Tuesdays as no fishing on Mondays), and fresh vegetables, using locally sourced ingredients to suit all tastes including Sunday roasts.
We have a weekly delivery service from Normandy so there is a French twist to our menu (escargots, bisque, cheeses, cassoulet for example). We also offer a takeaway service for suitable dishes. A free local delivery service is available for those who are housebound or elderly (with sufficient advance booking).
The Hook and Glove is very close to beautiful Bentley Wood and the Clarendon Way, has a footpath directly through the pub garden to stunning countryside and is an ideal stop off for walkers and cyclists to relax with a snack. The restaurant (or the whole pub and grounds) can be hired out for any special occasion including weddings, christenings, funerals and children's parties.
Dogs are very welcome in the front bar and also in the main restaurant on request.
Contact Us >


text:
- 1.5 pounds diced ham (about 4 cups)
- 3/4 cup mayo
- 1 tablespoon dijon mustard
- 1/4 teaspoon hot sauce
- 1 tablespoon Worcestershire sauce
- 1/2 teaspoon white vinegar
- 1.In a food processor, pulse diced ham until finely chopped. This can be done by hand, but a food processor sure is much faster. 2.In a large bowl, combine ham, mayo, mustard, hot sauce, Worcestershire, and vinegar and stir to combine well. 3.Refrigerate for at least two hours for best texture and flavor.
Nutritional Info
- Calories233
- Carbohydrates3 g(1%)
- Fat19 g(30%)
- Protein11 g(23%)
- Saturated Fat2 g(10%)
- Sodium914 mg(38%)
- Polyunsaturated Fat1 g
- Fiber1 g(4%)
- Monounsaturated Fat3 g
- Cholesterol46 mg(15%)


text:
Intro to College Moving: 101 »
We've put together a small list to get you started on your journey -- and the first step starts with a single box.
Today:9:00 am - 5:30 pm
12615 SW 91st St,
Miami, FL 33186
(305) 779-7420
in Business
Fully furnished apartments for temporary and extended stay in South Florida.
Regular Hours
Whether you are an executive or family on the move, in between homes, on an extended stay assignment or just visiting South Florida, we have the right apartment for you at half the price of a hotel and twice the comfort.
Shamrock Corporate Housing is your home away from home. We offer weekly and monthly rentals of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom apartments, fully furnished and equipped.
From custom-made furnishing to exceptional amenities, Shamrock offers a unique temporary living experience that feels like home. For stays of a week or longer in South Florida, we invite you to Be Our Guest at Shamrock.
Phone: (305) 598-5800
- rates are as follow for Kendall:
- 1 bedroom and 1 bathroom: $105 to $125 - 2 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms: $125 to $175 - 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms: $195 to $235
- rates are as follow for Coral Gables: 1 bedroom and 1 bathroom: $95 to $135 - 2 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms: $135 to $175 - 3 bedrooms and 2 bathrooms: $175 to 265
Shamrock Kendall is a beautiful gated garden-style community offering one, two, and three bedroom apartments. The apartments include custom-made furnishings plus all housewares. We are strategically located at the heart of Kendall close to major highways, hospitals, shopping malls, and restaurants.
Corporate Housing Providers Association
Parking: Lot, Free
Wheelchair Accessible: Yes
8960 SW 122nd Ave, Miami, FL
11461 SW 75th Ter, Miami, FL
10950 N Kendall Dr, 2nd Floor, Miami, FL
9300 SW 137th Ave, Miami, FL
16950 SW 93rd St, Miami, FL


text:
This is the full research report for 220.127.116.11, which is an IP address.
Pilsfree.net member workstations NAT 1:N
Pavel Muknsnabl
Tachovska 41, Plzen, CZ
Telephone: 420775163264
220.127.116.11 is the IP address you have a ran a report for on December, 03, 2016.
If you meant to use another IP other than 22.214.171.124, then enter above and try again.
It is 1:04 PM CET when you ran this report for 188.8.131.52 here on our website, IP-Adress.com. When it comes to 188.8.131.52, you can trust that if we have IP Whois information available for it, we will display it further below to assist in your research of this IP address. Feel free to run another search for 126.96.36.199 or a different search.
Timestamp Confirmation:
The IP Whois report for 188.8.131.52 was ran at 1:04 PM CET on December 3, 2016 and the information is provided below if available.
View comments on this 188.8.131.52 Whois IP address report below or add your own comment about 18.104.22.168.
Now you can review additional IP Whois data for 22.214.171.124 below. Things like the status of 188.8.131.52 and the server of 184.108.40.206.
Don't forget that the server that hosts 220.127.116.11 could also host other IP addresses, so research accordingly.
|Hello guest sign up now!
Remaining lookups today: 0 (Get more)
My IP is: 22.214.171.124


text:
That is hilarious! I'll bet that can be done with those talking toy parrots I've seen at Cracker Barrel!View Instructable »
Nevermind, I found out that for "Country" I need to enter the Two Letter State code, for example CA for California, then enter the city name.I'd still like to know if it's possible to get my personal weather reporting station on wunderground to report to my weather widget?
I just got my board running, but I have a problem! I see the local time just fine but for the temperature and other bit of weather info I only get "N/A". Anyone know why this is happening? I am using an API I got some time ago to use with my Pebble watch, but no longer have the watch. Do I need to apply for a new API?One other thing, I actually have my own weather reporting station which is displayed on Wunderground's website, is there a way I can get my OLED/ESP8266 weather widget to display my own weather station information?Thanks everyone.(I do not have much skills in the way of coding, so don't give me advice that's too complex- Thanks again!!)View Instructable »


text:
Weigh in: Proposed designs for a new mural at Rossi Pool
Rossi Pool on Arguello reopened recently after some maintenance work. In addition to an upgraded facility, Rossi is also slated for a little culture via a new mural on one of its interior walls. The San Francisco Arts Commission worked… Continue Reading


text:
Having unnecessary fat in various locations of your body can have a substantial influence on your health and self-confidence. While traditional weight loss through workout and diet plan is a terrific way to drop weight overall, even the very best workouts cannot target problem locations like the tummy, inner thighs, arms, and butts. Liposuction is a time evaluated treatment that is used to remove excess fat from specific locations of the body, enabling a specific to form and contour their body to their liking. Is liposuction right for you? Discover now.
Pros of Liposuction
There are many benefits to this cosmetic procedure, including:
• Immediately visible changes. Unlike standard weight-loss, liposuction develops changes that are right away noticeable in the body. Some difference is visible right away, and the desired outcomes are typically attained in simply a few days.
• Proven and safe. This cosmetic procedure has been performed by experienced cosmetic surgeons all over the world for many years and the technique has actually been refined over and once again to be safe and effective.
• Recovery time is typically fast. The downtime required after having this type of treatment is normally much less than exactly what is required for other kinds of cosmetic procedures, including tummy tucks, breast reduction, and more. Individuals who have had the treatment can typically return to work a lot more rapidly than they prepared for and can return to living a healthy, active way of life.
• Weight reduction can be irreversible. With the right maintenance techniques, the fat that was gotten rid of during the liposuction procedure will not return.
• Complete control over your body. With liposuction, a person can have complete control over how they want to look, beyond what traditional diet and workout can offer. Offering individuals this power over their bodies enhances self-confidence and aid people feel their very best.
While there countless advantages to liposuction, there are of course a couple of cautions that should be thought about before making the final decision to move on with the procedure.
Cons of Liposuction
Before having actually liposuction done, it is very important to analyze the potential downsides of the procedure and identify if the advantages exceed the threats in your certain case. Your cosmetic surgeon can help you learn more about the risks connected with the treatment and can help you decide if progressing is the ideal thing for you.
• Issues with general anesthesia. Due to the fact that liposuction is carried out under general anesthesia, the procedure carries the exact same risks as any other type of surgical treatment where general anesthesia is utilized. Hidden medical conditions might enhance these threats.• Unfavorable responses. Bruising, bleeding, and pain are all to be expected, however, in unusual cases can cause more significant issues.
• The potential to acquire the weight back. After having actually liposuction done, it is vital to keep a healthy diet plan and exercise correctly as suggested by your physician. Failure to do so could cause acquiring back the weight that was lost or possibly much more.
There are risks associated with liposuction, for lots of people, the benefits far exceed them. Inform yourself about the procedure by having extensive conversations with your cosmetic surgeon and think about how liposuction has the potential to affect you as an unique individual. Only you and your cosmetic surgeon can determine if liposuction will supply you with the results you are trying to find within your expectations.
Laser Liposuction procedure is a new non invasive procedure to loose unwanted bodyfat in Shunk Pennsylvania
Laser liposuction is a more recent, minimally invasive procedure that involves heating the fat cells to melting point and removing the melted fat through a little cannula. The treatment is generally done right in your physician's office and is an excellent alternative for people who have less than 500 ml of fat to get rid of from any one location. Laser liposuction can be a safe, complementary procedure to weight reduction in order to shape the body you have actually constantly wanted.
Contact a Surgeon in your Shunk Pennsylvania today.
If you're considering liposuction as a weight reduction solution, it's important that you discuss your desires with a certified plastic surgeon in your area. Your surgeon will carry out a total test and health history questionnaire to figure out if liposuction can benefit you and help you reach your physical and emotional goals. Call today for an assessment and learn more about how liposuction can help you accomplish the body of your dreams.


text:
Hilton Garden Inn Woodbridge
Select your stay dates to check availability at Hilton Garden Inn Woodbridge
Hilton Garden Inn Woodbridge
About the Hotel
Property Location
When you stay at Hilton Garden Inn Woodbridge in Woodbridge, you'll be convenient to Potomac Mills. This hotel is within the vicinity of Lake Ridge Park, Marina and Golf Course and G. Richard Pfitzner Stadium.
Make yourself at home in one of the 141 air-conditioned rooms featuring refrigerators and LCD televisions. Complimentary wired and wireless Internet access keeps you connected, and premium TV channels provides entertainment. Private bathrooms have complimentary toiletries and hair dryers. Conveniences include phones, as well as desks and microwaves.
Be sure to enjoy recreational amenities, including an indoor pool, a spa tub, and a fitness center. This hotel also features complimentary wireless Internet access, concierge services, and gift shops/newsstands.
Grab a bite to eat at the hotel's restaurant, which features a bar, or stay in and take advantage of room service (during limited hours). Quench your thirst with your favorite drink at a bar/lounge. Buffet breakfasts are available daily for a fee.
Business, Other Amenities
Featured amenities include complimentary high-speed (wired) Internet access, a 24-hour business center, and express check-out. Planning an event in Woodbridge? This hotel has 2538 square feet (228 square meters) of space consisting of conference space and meeting rooms. Free self parking is available onsite.
Hotel Facilities
- Multilingual staff
- Number of meeting rooms - 3
- Free wired high-speed Internet
- Conference space size (feet) - 2538
- Spa tub
- Free WiFi
- Express check-out
- ATM/banking
- Bar/lounge
- Indoor pool
- Number of floors - 6
- Restaurant
- Concierge services
- Tours/ticket assistance
- Conference space
- Breakfast available (surcharge)
- 24-hour business center
- Luggage storage
- Designated smoking areas
- Fitness facilities
- Snack bar/deli
- Conference space size (meters) - 228
- Safe-deposit box at front desk
- Free self parking
- Free parking nearby
- Free newspapers in lobby
- Laundry facilities
- Elevator/lift
- Designated smoking areas (fines apply)
- Gift shops or newsstand
- Dry cleaning/laundry service
- Total number of rooms - 141
- Meeting rooms 3
- 24-hour front desk
Room Facilities
- Premium TV channels
- Free toiletries
- Blackout drapes/curtains
- Phone
- Desk
- Daily housekeeping
- Hair dryer
- In-room climate control (air conditioning)
- Iron/ironing board
- Refrigerator
- Free WiFi
- Microwave
- Air conditioning
- Private bathroom
- Room service (limited hours)
- Cribs/infant beds (surcharge)
- Turndown service
- Free wired high-speed Internet
- Rollaway/extra beds available
- Coffee/tea maker
Hotel Policy
The following fees and deposits are charged by the property at time of service, check-in, or check-out.
- Fee for buffet breakfast: USD 10.95 per person (approximately)
- Crib (infant bed) fee: USD 10 per night
- Rollaway bed fee: USD 10 per night
The above list may not be comprehensive. Fees and deposits may not include tax and are subject to change.Show all hotel policy Show less hotel policy


text:
It's Up to You
31,037pages onAdd New Page
this wiki
this wiki
Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you've made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
|Written by
|Alan O'Day and Janis Liebhart
|Mad Muppet Melodies
"It's Up to You" is a Muppet Babies song from the episode "What Do You Want to Be When You Grow Up?"
Sheet music for the song is included in the book Favorite Songs from Jim Henson's Muppets.
Album releases
- Rocket to the Stars (1985)
- Favorite Songs from Jim Henson's Muppets (1986)


text:
Stoik Coupon Codes
Find Photo and Video editor, converter, media browser, morphing software and more
Find Photo and Video editor, converter, media browser, morphing software and more. Search for Imagic, Smart Resizer, Video Enhancer, MDScan, CaricatureMe, Face Tone Corrector, Noise AutoFix and more only at stoik.com.
Recently Expired Stoik Coupons
30% off STOIK Imagic Premium Software
Order this Premium Software price only $34.30 (was $49) at stoik.com.
30% discount on Video Converter Software
Purchase Video Converter Software with 30% off at stoik.com.
Save 30% on Stitch Creator Software
Get Stitch Creator Software for just $34.30 (list price $49) at stoik.com.
30% discount on Smart Resizer - 3
Shop and avail 30% savings on Smart Resizer - 3.
30% Off Hobby Suite - 1
Get Hobby Suite - 1 with savings of 30%.
15% Savings on Deformer
Purchase Deformer software and get 15% discount by using Stoik coupon code.
Save 15% on Stitch Creator
Purchase Stitch Creator and get 15% discount at stoik.com. Enter promo code STPROMO during checkout process.
15% Discount on PanoramaMaker for Mac
Take the chance to use coupon code STPROMO: Buy PanoramaMaker (Mac) and get 15% discount from stoik.com.
15% Off Imagic Premium
Buy Imagic Premium and get 15% discount from stoik.com. Enter promo code STPROMO at checkout.
Save 15% on STOIK MorphMan
Use STPROMO coupon code: Avail a 15% savings when you purchase MorphMan Software.


text:
- Custom Pool Installation in Farmville, VA
- Skillful Pool Installation in Farmville, VA
- Free Estimates on Pool Installation in Farmville, VA
Pool Installation in Farmville, VA
Pool installation Farmville, VA services are very necessary when you want a pool installed in back of your home but do not want to do the work yourself. Installing an entire pool is a lot of work, so you will not want to attempt doing it yourself. The professionals in your area will be able to provide you with the installation services you need so you will have a pool to swim in anytime you want. A pool is a great thing to have, especially on very hot days when you and the family want a quick way to cool down.
Avg Costs for Pool Installation
Min Cost
Max Cost
Avg Cost
$6,066.76 - $8,489.25
Find the Best Quality Pool Installation - Farmville, VA
By taking advantage of Farmville pool installation services, you will be able to get the pool you need without doing any work yourself. These installation services are highly recommended for anyone who wants a pool, whether it is aboveground or underground. You should take some time to consider what kind of pool you want installed so you make the right final decision. Having an underground pool installed will most likely be more expensive, but it comes with some benefits that you won't get with an above ground pool. In the end you will be glad you considered all of your options.
Pool Installation Companies
Pool Wizard
1812 E 3rd St
Farmville, VA 23901
Mike's Pool & Spa Shoppe
1835-A Rosser Avenue
Amelia Court House, VA 23002
Pool Wizard Inc
15501 Goodes Bridge Rd
Amelia Court Hse, VA 23002
Krystal Klear Pools & Spas, Inc.
305 Bonbrook Creek Rd.
Cumberland, VA 23040
Valley Pool & Spa Company
1520 N Delphine Ave
Waynesboro, VA 23002


text:
The distance between these two cities is around 625Kms, and can be reached in approximately 10hrs 20min.Sea Bird Tourist operates close to 2 buses from Satara to Bangalore. The first bus starts from 10:10 PM and you can catch buses till 11:30 PM. The lowest fare for these buses starts from Rs.1200, and the maximum fare is around Rs.1200.
Sea Bird Tourist provide a number of options in the type of buses like A/C Sleeper for your to choose from.
Satara is located in the western region of Maharashtra, near the union of the two great rivers Krishna and Venna. The historic city of Satara is located amidst the beauty and grandeur of nature, so if you plan to travel towards the city then set yourselves for the most mesmerizing experience of your life. Located in the central region of the state, Satara can be easily reached by the means of road, rail and air. Satara bus services cover the entire state with busses plying at frequent Satara bus timings. Satara to Pune and Satara to Mumbai routes face the busiest traffic all around the year.
Bangalore is the capital of Karnataka. It is one of the fastest growing multi-ethnic cities of Asia. It is home to some of the most important industries of the country, especially the Information Technology industry and biotechnology industry. Due to the presence of a large number of IT companies, Bangalore is often called the 'Silicon Valley' of India. Bangalore houses some of India's leading organizations like ISRO, DRDO and the like. Bangalore is also a famous educational hub in the southern part of India. Bangalore, renamed as Bengaluru, is gifted with a pleasing climate. It has many gardens & parks, natural lakes, and other attractions. It offers a judicious mix of tradition and modernity. Bangalore enjoys great connectivity with all the important cities of the world. It is well connected with the nearby cities and towns by roadways. Buses are available to cities like Chennai, Mangalore, Coimbatore, Trivandrum, Kochi, Hyderabad and Pune among others.
It was d worst services i experienced till date & what to say about puncuality, pick up was at 10.10PM but bus came at 12.30 PM..in an unknown city single person how can wait till this time...horrible experience..will never book this bus o
Travel was ok-ish. A bus picked me up from Surur Phata after I talked with a driver. The Bus conductor was extremely arrogant Kannadiga, but the bus driver was Ok. It seemed driver did not know clearly where the Surur Phata is ( Surur Phata is very famous by the way !). It was a nightmare to get drivers number. None of the numbers provided by RedBus (on the ticket, as well as by call center) did work. I had to call my friend to gather seabird travels numbers from the internet. Even in those numbers, many were not working.
What a punctuality, bus arrived 2.5 hrs late. If you guys cant take responsibilities then this REDBUS service is just to make money rather than taking care of passengers. about delays, change in timings. I have booked ticket for my brother who reached banglore 3 hr late due to service of the bus. If you people dont have seriousness about your passengers time then We need to rethink. Next time Ill prefer to book through local travels agent or govt bus services.
Bus was late by 4 hours and I didnt board the bus, I am still on way to Bangalore, Bus driver and other staff behaviour was to bad. I was keep calling and they were not answering the calls, later they said bus is delayed by 4 hours so I cant wait at highway late night and so I returned home and I didnt board the bus. You should help to file a feedback to Seabird tours.


text:
Enquire Today
Property Search
Condo for rent Jomtien CRE - C002706
Rented Until Aug 2017
Very nice studio condo for rent in View Talay 7, a beachfront building in Jomtien. The condo is well finished and fully furnished. There is a nice sea view from the private balcony. Easy walking distance to Dong Tan beach and easy access to local transportation around Pattaya and Jomtien make this a perfect location. The building offers a communal pool, car parking and security.
View Talay 7 is a high rise condo development just steps from Dongtan and Jomtien Beach. The condos offer wonderful sea and city views. There is private access to the beach.


text:
Size In Yrs
Our all-time favourite Nehru Jackets are a must have in your son's wardrobe. For a classic statement you can co-ordinate these jackets with Indian wear while for an indo western fusion you can team it with western casuals as well as formals .
© Copyright 2016 Fabindia.com. All Rights Reserved.


text:
The kingsleys loves charlotte meme was made with Third World Skeptical Kid meme generator.
Like This Image? Share it with family and friends on Facebook, Google+, and Twitter, browse more Third World Skeptical Kid memes, or find the most popular memes created with MemesHappen.
Total Views:72 views Views Today: 1 views Last Viewed: 2016-12-08 16:58:27


text:
So like I mentioned in an earlier post I wated to put up more autumn inspired posts. And also some uplifting one's because I know there are many who feel a bit depressed when it's all grey and rainy. But today I'm here to tell you that since there is nothiong we can do about the weather, let's try to look at it differently. I'm trying to say that rain can be beautiful too.
As a kid one of the best feelings I knew was to sit in a car whilst it was raining outside. I'm syre some of you guys also know the feeling. So I'm trying to capture that feeling whenever it's a rainy day now. So try an snuggle up with a cup of tea or hot coco under a warm blanket and put a "comfort-film" on (you know, like the movie version of comfort food). And if you're at work and can't snuggle up on the sofa then try to remember that in a couple of hours you can be in your car whilst it's raining, or on the buss, or the train.
And if you don't like any of this stuff and has just decided that you're not going to like rain, then you can just keep in mind that after rain comes sunshine!


text: Stores Dealer Profile PAT METZGER FLOORING Shaw believes in its people, products and mission. Purchasing flooring can be daunting, but we're committed to making easier for you every step of the way. Shaw creates a better future – for our customers, our people, our company and our communities. This attention to detail and extreme focus can be found in our beautiful, innovative products. Store Information GET DIRECTIONS 2935 E Clear Lake Ave Ste 1 Springfield, IL 62702-6061 217-744-7711 Financing Shaw Consumer Credit Read More & Apply Now Flooring CarpetTile & StoneHardwoodResilient View all stores


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
United States District Court, District of Columbia
October 23, 2014
CAROL MURPHY, Plaintiff,v.DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, et al., Defendants.
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis and her pro se complaint. The Court will grant the application and dismiss the complaint.
Plaintiff alleges that defendants unlawfully deprived her of social security benefits while she was incarcerated. See Compl. ¶¶ 1, 8, 10. She believes that she "is owed approximately $50, 000. withheld from her over a four year period and she asks the court to make a judgment in that amount to her." Id. at 3. The Court construes the complaint as plaintiffs request for social security benefits. It does not appear, however, that the matter is properly before the Court.
A party may seek judicial review of "any final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security made after a hearing to which [she] was a party, irrespective of the amount in controversy, ... by a civil action commenced within sixty days after the mailing to [her] of notice of such decision ... in the district court of the United States for the judicial district in which the plaintiff resides, or has [her] principal place of business, or, if [she] does not reside or have [her] principal place of business within any such judicial district, in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia." 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Missing from the complaint are allegations that plaintiff has received a final decision of the Commissioner, or that she brings this action within 60 days of receipt of thed ecision, or that, in light of her residence in Maine, the District of Columbia is the proper forum. Accordingly, the complaint will be dismissed. See, e.g., Ryan v. Brady, 776 F.Supp. 1 (D.D.C. 1991), aff'd, 12 F.3d 245 (D.C. Cir. 1993).
An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
Our sale price AUD49.95 Laid Back Dress in Blue Print This flirty blue print dress is perfect for casual weekend dressing. With its light and comfy fabric; this piece is a summer wardrobe must have! – Model is wearing size 8 AUS / 4 US / 8 UK- Model's height is 170cm / 5ft 6in Direct online shopping. stockist online.
Extra fast delivery Australia Wide
free express shipping within Australia on all orders over $50 ranges from 1 – 2 business days depending on where you live.
All purchases over $50 are shipped express from Sydney with Australia Post at no additional charge.
Under $50 gets a flat low $7 delivery charge.
International Customers will have their items shipped via DHL Global Mail taking approximately 7 – 25 business days to arrive but can take longer depending on your location.
Displayed for authorised Australia supplier official website Showpo. sku 155476-BluePrint.


text:
Home /
Our Sources / About Us
/ FAQs /
Advanced Search
Not what you're
looking for? Try an advanced search.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
October 5, 2011
JOHN URBINO, FOR HIMSELF AND ON BEHALF OF OTHER CURRENT AND FORMER EMPLOYEES, PLAINTIFFS,v.ORKIN SERVICES OF CALIFORNIA, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION; ROLLINS, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.
Plaintiff John Urbino brought this representative action against Orkin Services of California, Inc. and Rollins, Inc. (collectively, "Defendants") for violations of the California Labor Code as an aggrieved employee, on behalf of himself and other current and former employees, under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 ("PAGA"), Cal. Lab. Code §§ 2698--2699, in Los Angeles Superior Court. Defendants subsequently removed the action to this Court based on diversity jurisdiction. Defendants now move to compel arbitration of Plaintiff's PAGA claim based on a written arbitration agreement between Plaintiff and Defendants. At the same time, Plaintiff moves to remand the action, alleging that there is no diversity jurisdiction because the amount in controversy does not exceed $75,000.
Because there is complete diversity of citizenship and Defendants have shown more likely than not that the projected total amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, as calculated by aggregating the claims of the aggrieved employees under the "common and undivided" exception to the anti-aggregation rule, Plaintiff's motion to remand is DENIED. Defendants' motion to compel arbitration is also DENIED because the arbitration agreement contains an unconscionable PAGA arbitration waiver, rendering the agreement unenforceable under California law.
Plaintiff worked for Defendants as a nonexempt, hourly-paid employee in Los Angeles from June 2005 until July 2010. (Compl. ¶¶ 4, 8; Decl. of J. Blandford in Supp. Pet. to Compel Arbit. ¶ 3.) Defendants are incorporated in Delaware and provide pest control services in the State of California, including in Los Angeles County. (Compl. ¶¶ 5--6.) At the time of his hire, Plaintiff signed an arbitration agreement (the "Agreement"), which also incorporated Defendants' Dispute Resolution Policy ("DRP"). (Decl. of J. Blandford in Supp. Pet. to Compel Arbit. ¶¶ 3--4 & Exh. A; Defs.' Notice of Errata Re Decl. J. Blandford, Exh. 1. ) Under the Agreement, executed on June 17, 2005, Plaintiff agreed "to arbitrate any dispute, claim or controversy regarding or arising out of [his] employment." (Decl. of J. Blandford in Supp. Pet. to Compel Arbit., Exh. A.) The Agreement also stated that the arbitral procedures would be governed by the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA"). (Id.) The Agreement further contains the following limitation on arbitration proceedings: any arbitration proceeding under this Agreement will not be consolidated or joined with any action or legal proceeding under any other agreement or involving any other employees, and will not proceed as a class action, private attorney general action or similar representative action.
(Id.) The DRP also includes the same provision. (See Defs.' Notice of Errata Re Decl. J. Blandford, Exh. 1, at 12.) On June 21, 2011, Plaintiff filed this instant PAGA action against Defendants in Los Angeles Superior Court, alleging that Defendants deprived him and other current and former nonexempt employees of their rightful meal periods, overtime and vacation wages, and accurate itemized wage statements, in violation of various sections of the California Labor Code. (Compl. ¶¶ 1--4, 16.) Specifically, pursuant to California Labor Code § 2699(f), Plaintiff, as an aggrieved employee, on behalf of himself and other current and former employees, seeks civil penalties for Defendants' purported violations of California Labor Code §§ 2699(f), 558, 226.3, 1174.5, and 1197.1. (Id. ¶ 18.)*fn1
On August 5, 2011, Defendants removed the action to this Court based on diversity jurisdiction. (Dkt. No. 1; Defs.' Notice of Removal ¶¶ 5--25.) On August 15, 2011, Defendants moved to compel arbitration. (Dkt. No. 12.) At the same time, Defendants filed a counterclaim for declaratory relief against Plaintiff under 28 U.S.C. § 2201, requesting a judicial declaration that Mr. Urbino's claims are subject to the parties' Agreement and DRP; that all of Mr. Urbino's claims against Defendants be resolved in the arbitral forum; and that Mr. Urbino be prohibited from bringing any claims under PAGA. (Defs.' CounterClaim ¶ 13; Dkt. No. 14.) On September 2, 2011, Plaintiff moved to remand the action based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Dkt. No. 21.) The Court continued Defendants' motion to compel arbitration to coincide with Plaintiff's motion to remand, scheduled for October 3, 2011. (Ct. Order, Dkt. No. 28, Sept. 15, 2011.) On September 29, 2011, the Court took Defendants' motion to compel arbitration and Plaintiff's motion to remand under submission. (Ct. Order, Dkt. No. 31, Sept. 29, 2011.)
The Court has proper subject matter jurisdiction over this action because there is complete diversity of the parties and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1).
A. Legal Standard
A civil action brought in a state court, but over which a federal court may exercise original jurisdiction, may be removed by the defendant to a federal district court. 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). However, "[a] suit may be removed to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a) only if it could have been brought there originally." Sullivan v. First Affiliated Sec., Inc., 813 F.2d 1368, 1371 (9th Cir. 1987); Infuturia Global Ltd. v. Sequus Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 631 F.3d 1133, 1135 n.1 (9th Cir. 2011) ("[A] federal court must have both removal and subject matter jurisdiction to hear a case removed from state court.")The burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction falls on the party seeking removal, and the removal statute is strictly construed against removal jurisdiction. Gaus v. Miles, Inc., 980 F.2d 564, 566 (9th Cir. 1992) ("Federal jurisdiction must be rejected if there is any doubt as to the right of removal in the first instance.") A federal court can assert subject matter jurisdiction over cases that (1) involve questions arising under federal law or (2) are between diverse parties and involve an amount in controversy that exceeds $75,000. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332. If it appears that the federal court lacks subject matter jurisdiction at any time prior to the entry of final judgment, the federal court must remand the action to state court. 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c).*fn2
B. Diversity Jurisdiction
A district court has original "diversity" subject matter jurisdiction over all "civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interests and cost," and the action is "between citizens of different States." 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(1). The district court has jurisdiction only if there is "complete diversity" between the parties, meaning that each plaintiff is a citizen of a different state than each defendant. See id.; Caterpillar Inc. v. Lewis, 519 U.S. 61, 68 (1996) (citing Strawbridge v. Curtiss, 3 Cranch. 267 (1806)).
The parties do not contest that complete diversity of the parties exists. The parties, however, disagree over whether the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. Plaintiff's Complaint does not allege a specific amount in controversy. Although Plaintiff alleges specific amounts per initial and subsequent violations under California Labor Code §§ 2699(f), 558(a)(1), 226.3, 1174.5, 1197.1, it is uncertain how many employees or pay periods are at issue. Where, as here, the state court complaint is unclear as to whether the requisite amount of controversy is pled, defendant bears the burden of establishing by a "preponderance of the evidence" that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. Guglielmino v. McKee Foods Corp., 506 F.3d 696, 699 (9th Cir. 2007).*fn3 To meet this standard, the defendant needs to "provide evidence establishing that it is 'more likely than not' that the amount in controversy exceeds" $75,000. Sanchez v. Monumental Life Ins. Co., 102 F.3d 398, 404 (9th Cir. 1996). The district court considers facts presented in the defendant's removal petition as well as summary judgment-type of evidence relevant to the amount of controversy at the time of removal, but conclusory allegations regarding the amount in controversy are insufficient. Matheson v. Progressive Specialty Ins. Co., 319 F.3d 1089, 1090--91 (9th Cir. 2003) (per curiam).
In this case, Defendants have submitted a declaration by Tamera Roberson, an employee of Rollins, Inc., who provides system analysis and data retrieval services for Defendants, attesting to the fact that there were 811 individuals employed by Orkin as nonexempt employees in California, and that from June 21, 2010 (the date Plaintiff filed this action) through the present, Orkin issued at least 17,182 paychecks for the time worked by the 811 nonexempt employees in California. (Decl. of T. Roberson in Supp. Defs.' Removal ¶¶ 9--11; Defs.' Notice of Removal ¶ 6.) Using these figures and the statutory penalty amounts, Defendants calculate the total amount in controversy for the statutory penalties related to the alleged initial violations of the Labor Code §§ 2699(f), 558(a)(1), 226.3, and 1197.1(a)(1), to be $405,500,*fn4 and the total amount in controversy for subsequent violations of Labor Code §§ 2699(f), 558(a)(2), and 1197.1(a)(2), to be $9,004,050.00.*fn5 (Notice of Removal ¶ 6.) Under PAGA, of the civil penalties recovered by the aggrieved employees, 75 percent is allotted to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency ("LWDA") while 25 percent goes to the aggrieved employees.
Cal. Lab. Code § 2699(i). Defendants claim that because 75 percent of $9,004,050.00 is well over the jurisdictional amount and because a PAGA claim need not satisfy class action requirements under Arias v. Superior Court, 46 Cal. 4th 969, 980 (2009), this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action. (Notice of Removal ¶¶ 8, 10--11.)
Plaintiff does not take issue with Defendants' final calculation and agrees that his PAGA claim is not being brought as a class action. (Pl.'s Mem. in Supp. Remand, at 3-- 4; Defs.' Opp. to Remand, at 5.) The parties also agree that, as clarified in Arias, a PAGA action is essentially a law enforcement action brought on behalf of the State and need not meet the requirements for a class action. (Notice of Removal ¶ 10; Pl.'s Mem. in Supp. Remand, at 3--4.) However, the parties disagree on the method of calculating damages for a nonclass PAGA action. Plaintiff argues that under PAGA, an individual has a separate and distinct claim, such that the aggrieved employees' claims cannot be aggregated to meet the jurisdictional amount under the well-established anti-aggregation rule. (Pls.' Mem. in Supp. Remand, at 5--6.) Plaintiff further claims, using Defendants' figures, that in this case no single individual employee's damages exceed $75,000, as the damages entitled to each employee is approximately $11,602.40 ($9,409,550.00 / 811). (Id. at 6.) According to Plaintiff, Defendants impermissibly aggregate the claims of all the aggrieved employees to meet the jurisdictional threshold. (Id.) Finally, Plaintiff contends aggregation is not permitted under the "common and undivided" exception because a PAGA action consists of separate and distinct individual claims. (Id.) Defendants do not challenge the application of the anti-aggregation rule or argue that the "common and undivided" exception to the anti-aggregation applies here. Instead, Defendants contend that the amount in controversy is not based on aggregating individual claims at all, but on what the State -- as a putative plaintiff in a PAGA action -- is entitled to under PAGA. (Notice of Removal ¶¶ 10--11; Defs.' Opp. to Remand, at 4--5.)
The Court disagrees with Plaintiff's analysis and finds that Defendants have met their burden of showing more likely than not that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. The issue of how the amount in controversy is calculated in a PAGA action has not been addressed by the Ninth Circuit, while recent district court decisions are divided. The Court will first discuss the nature and purpose of a PAGA action and then examine the relevant rules for calculating the amount in controversy for diversity jurisdiction.
1. Representative Actions under PAGA
The California Supreme Court in Arias v. Superior Court discussed at length the distinctive features of a PAGA action. Under PAGA, a plaintiff brings a representative action as an "aggrieved employee," on behalf of himself and other current or former employees, and seeks civil penalties for Labor Code violations by employers, with 75 percent going to the LWDA and the remaining 25 percent to the aggrieved employees. Cal. Lab. Code § 2699(a), (i). In 2003, the California Legislature enacted PAGA in response to staffing reductions for labor law enforcement agencies and to enable aggrieved employees to act as private attorneys general to recover civil penalties for Labor Code violations, "with the understanding that labor law enforcement agencies were to retain primacy over private enforcement efforts." Arias, 46 Cal. 4th at 980 (citing Cal. Lab. Code § 2698, et seq., Stats. 2003, ch. 906, §§ 1, 2, eff. Jan. 1, 2004.) A private plaintiff asserting a PAGA claim is thus "essentially bringing a law enforcement action designed to protect the public and not to benefit private parties." Id. at 986 (internal citation and quotes omitted). The plaintiff acts as a "proxy or agent of the state's labor law enforcement agencies," such that the plaintiff "represents the same legal right and interest as state labor law enforcement agencies -- namely, recovery of civil penalties that otherwise would have been assessed and collected by the [LWDA]." Id.
The California Supreme Court also distinguished a class action from a PAGA action, noting that PAGA claims may, but need not be brought as class action claims. Id. at 981 & n.5; see also id. at 976 n.2 (stating that a "representative action" may be either class or nonclass actions). As a nonclass representative action, a PAGA suit need not satisfy class action requirements. Id. at 975, 981--87; see also Sample v. Big Lots Stores, Inc., No. C 10-03276, 2010 WL 4939992, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 30, 2010).
In this case, the Complaint contains no allegations suggesting that
the PAGA claim is being brought as a class action. Thus, Plaintiff's
PAGA claim need not meet class action requirements, and the issue of
whether the case is removable under CAFA is irrelevant.*fn6
For a nonclass PAGA action, as here, the issue is whether the
amount in controversy may be calculated by aggregating the civil
penalties of all the aggrieved employees. Plaintiff argues that civil
penalties cannot be aggregated because claims in a PAGA action are
separate and distinct, not common and undivided. (Pls.' Mem. in Supp.
Remand, at 5--6.) The Court disagrees and finds that the "common and
undivided" exception applies to a PAGA claim.
2. The Anti-Aggregation Rule
As a general rule, multiple plaintiffs who assert "separate and distinct" claims in a lawsuit may not aggregate their claims to satisfy the jurisdictional amount. Troy Bank of Troy, Ind. v. G.A. Whitehead & Co., 222 U.S. 39, 40 (1911); Synder v. Harris, 394 U.S. 332, 335 (1969); Gibson v. Chrysler Corp., 261 F.3d 927, 943--44 (2001). But "when several plaintiffs unite to enforce a single title or right, in which they have a common and undivided interest, it is enough if their interests collectively equal the jurisdictional amount." Troy, 222 U.S. at 40--41; see also Synder, 394 U.S. at 335.*fn7 Although the distinction between "distinct and separate" versus "common and undivided" claims is not always clear, the Ninth Circuit noted in Eagle v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co. that "the character of the interest asserted depends on the source of plaintiffs' claims. If the claims are derived from rights that they hold in group status, then the claims are common and undivided. If not, the claims are separate and distinct." 769 F.2d 541, 546 (9th Cir. 1985).*fn8
The Ninth Circuit has not yet ruled on the issue of whether individual claims in a PAGA action are "separate and distinct," "common and undivided," or otherwise. District courts within the Ninth Circuit are split on the issue. Two district court decisions have recently interpreted claims in a PAGA action to be separate and distinct, thereby precluding aggregation to meet the jurisdictional amount. See Zator v. Sprint/United Mgmt. Co., No. 09cv2577, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33383, at *3 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 29, 2011) ("The claim by one plaintiff must satisfy the $75,000 amount in controversy requirement; the claims of other aggrieved employees cannot be aggregated to reach that threshold."); Pulera v. TW Construction Co., Inc., No. 2:08-cv-00275, 2008 WL 3863489, at *4 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2008) ("The amounts recoverable by Plaintiff based on his PAGA claims are separate and distinct from the amounts recoverable by the State of California via the LWDA, and therefore these amounts may not be aggregated."). Relying heavily on the Zator decision, Plaintiff argues that the claims of the aggrieved employees cannot be aggregated because their claims are separate and distinct. (Pls.' Mem. in Supp. Remand, at 5.)
In contrast to the Pulera and Zator decisions, the district court in Thomas v. Aetna Health of California, Inc. found a PAGA claim to be "common and undivided because the right to pursue the action derives solely from the LWDA's interest in enforcement of the Labor Code," while "[a]ggrieved employees have no right to seek any individual recovery under PAGA and are precluded from bringing repeated PAGA suits." No. 1:10-cv-01906, 2011 WL 2173715, at *19 (E.D. Cal. June 2, 2011). The Thomas court reasoned that "aggrieved employees have no separate and individual rights to pursue under PAGA that would transform it from a law enforcement action that furthers the interests of the LWDA into a myriad of separate and distinct claims of the aggrieved employees." Id. Analogizing a PAGA action to a typical shareholders' derivative suit, the Thomas court held that "the amount at stake in a PAGA claim is predicated on the total amount of the penalties that can be sought by the aggrieved employees as the proxy of the LWDA." Id.
The Court disagrees with the analysis offered by the Pulera and Zator courts and finds the Thomas court's reasoning persuasive. The decision in Pulera and Zator do not fully taken into account the purpose and nature of a PAGA claim. In Pulera, the plaintiff brought an action in federal court for PAGA civil penalties. Pulera, 2008 WL 3863489, at *1. One of the defendants moved to dismiss the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on the grounds that the amount in controversy fell below $75,000, as measured by the individual plaintiff's possible recovery. Id. at *1, *2. The court rejected the plaintiff's argument that the LWDA's recovery under PAGA should not be separated from his individual claim because, instead of "neither party" being able to enforce the claim without the other, which is characteristic of a common and undivided claim, either the plaintiff or LWDA could enforce the claim under PAGA. Id. at *3--*4. The court observed that because the aggrieved employees could adjudicate their own claims, the amount in controversy should be determined by what is recoverable by the employee individually. Id. at *4. The court accordingly granted the defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Id. *5.
But the Pulera court overlooked the fact that while an aggrieved employee may separately litigate a PAGA claim if the LWDA declines to do so, a PAGA action is essentially a representative action brought by a group of aggrieved employees on behalf of the State. The primary beneficiary is the public at large, not the private individuals involved. As noted in Arias v. Superior Court, "any direct financial benefit to those harmed by the employer's unlawful conduct is ancillary to the primary object" of a PAGA claim -- namely, to further the reach of the LWDA and protect the public's interest. 46 Cal. 4th at 987 n.7; see also Ochoa-Hernandez v. Cjaders Foods, Inc., No. C 08-2073, 2010 WL 1340777, at *4 (N.D. Cal. April 2, 2010) (unlike a class action, the purpose of a PAGA suit "is to incentivize private parties to recover civil penalties for the government that otherwise may not have been assessed and collected by overburdened state enforcement agencies"). Furthermore, the PAGA statute does not enable a single aggrieved employee to litigate his or her claims, but requires an aggrieved employee "on behalf of herself or himself and other current or former employees" to enforce violations of the Labor Code by their employers. Cal. Lab. Code § 2699(a) (emphasis added). The statute also awards civil penalties to the aggrieved employees as a whole. See id. § 2699(i) (stating that "civil penalties recovered by aggrieved employees shall be distributed as follows: 75 percent to the [LWDA] . . . and 25 percent to the aggrieved employees"). The statute therefore contemplates a common group action with civil penalties being awarded to the entire group.
The Zator case, whilemore closely analogous to the facts in the instant action, is still distinguishable. In Zator, the plaintiffbrought a representative PAGA claim, seeking civil penalties for violations of various sections of the Labor Code as well as attorneys' fees and costs. 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33383, at *4--*5.*fn9 As in Pulera, the Zator court observed that individual claims in a PAGA action are separate and distinct and thus aggregation was not permitted to meet the jurisdictional amount. However, as support for this proposition, the Zator court relied on Bernal v. Comerica Bank, No. CV 10-04631, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88688 (C.D. Cal. July 30, 2010), which involved a class-action PAGA claim. In Bernal, the court applied the rule that where federal jurisdiction is not invoked by CAFA, "in order for the court to exercise diversity jurisdiction over the putative class claims, at least one of the named plaintiffs must independently satisfy the amount-controversy requirement." 2010 LEXIS 88688, at *10--*11. But in contrast to Bernal, the present PAGA action is not being brought as a class action. Furthermore, the defendant in neither Bernal nor Zator offered a calculation of the amount in controversy based on a total number of aggrieved employees. Nor did the court in Zator wrestle with the question of whether PAGA claims may be aggregated because they are "common and undivided," but rather decided on the issue of whether attorney fees should be attributed to all aggrieved employees or solely to the representative plaintiff. 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3383, *8--*11. The Zator court also declined to explicitly resolve the issue of whether all the penalties sought by plaintiff should be counted in the amount in controversy or just those amounts he was eligible to receive, although the court stated it was inclined to adopt the latter position consistent with Pulera's viewpoint. Id. at *11.
3. The "Common and Undivided" Exception
The "common and undivided" exception to the anti-aggregation rule applies to a PAGA action. The amount in controversy calculus used in Pulera and Zator is premised on the understanding that a PAGA claim consists of a collection of distinct and separate individual claims. But, as the Arias court explained, a PAGA action is essentially a law enforcement action designed to benefit the public, not to compensate aggrieved employees. The district court in Thomas v. AETNA Health of California more recently opined at length on the issue of whether PAGA claims may be aggregated in light of the fundamental nature and purpose of a PAGA action. In that case, the plaintiff brought a nonclass PAGA action in state court, which was subsequently removed by defendants on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. Thomas, 2011 WL 2173715,at *2. The plaintiff moved to remand the action, claiming, as does the Plaintiff here, that there was no diversity jurisdiction because the penalties under PAGA attributable to her were less than $75,000. Id. at *4, *9. The defendants argued that the jurisdictional amount was satisfied because all potential civil penalties as to the aggrieved employees could be aggregated and that the total penalties for the group exceeded $75,000. Id. The defendants reasoned that the aggrieved employees do not hold separate and distinct claims, but an "all-for-one and one-for-all" claim for PAGA penalties. Id. at *13.*fn10 The district court agreed with the defendants' argument and held that "the amount at stake in a PAGA claim is predicated on the total amount of the penalties that can be sought by the aggrieved employees as the proxy of the LWDA." Id. at *19. Applying this calculus, the court found that the defendants showed more likely than not that the PAGA penalties at issue amounted to more than $75,000. Id. at *21. Accordingly, the court concluded that it had subject matter jurisdiction over the PAGA claim and denied the plaintiff's motion to remand the action. Id.
The Ninth Circuit has considered the application of the "common and undivided" exception to permit aggregation in different contexts. See Gibson, 261 F.3d at 944. Of relevance here is the Ninth Circuit's allowance of aggregation of minority shareholders' claims in a class action suit against the majority shareholder of a corporation in Eagle v. Chrysler Corp., 769 F.2d 541 (9th Cir. 1984). In that case, the plaintiff minority shareholder of a telephone company brought a class action in state court against a corporate majority shareholder for allegedly breaching its fiduciary duty by causing the company to forego certain tax breaks to the company's financial detriment, which in turn, caused minority shareholders to lose approximately $38 million. Id. at 544. The defendant successfully removed the class action to federal court, after which the plaintiff amended the damage allegation in his complaint to be approximately $4,200, which was below the then-jurisdictional amount of $10,000. Id. At issue before the Ninth Circuit was whether plaintiff's action was improperly removed from state court based on the damages alleged in the complaint. Id. at 545. The Ninth Circuit held that plaintiff's claim was "common and undivided" and thus the total aggregated damages of $38 million satisfied the jurisdictional threshold. Id. The Eagle court likened the action to a typical shareholder derivative suit under California law where "the source of the shareholders' claim for the wrongful depletion of corporate assets is the common and undivided interest each shareholder has in a corporation's assets and a right to share in dividends." Id. at 546. The Eagle court found that the minority shareholders were in the same position as shareholders in a typical derivative action with respect to the source of their injury, which was derivative of the injury to the corporation. Id. at 547. Thus, as the plaintiff's claim "derive[d] wholly from an alleged injury to the corporation's assets," the Ninth Circuit concluded that the minority shareholders' claims were common and undivided, thereby permitting aggregation. Id.
The Thomas court specifically analogized a representative PAGA action to a shareholders' derivative suit in Eagle, observing that in a typical shareholders' derivative suit, "the corporation sustains the primary injury; injury to the shareholders is only indirect," and "[a]s a result, the shareholders step into the shoes of the corporation and assert its interests -- they have no individual right to recovery." Id. at *17; see also Cotton v. Expo Powers Systems, Inc., 170 Cal. App. 4th 1371, 1380 (2009) (a derivative suit is an equitable action in which the shareholder of a corporate sues on behalf of the corporation, purporting to assert a claim that belongs to the corporation); Grosset v. Wenass, 42 Cal. 4th 1100, 1114 (2008) (the corporation is the ultimate beneficiary of the derivative suit). In light of the fundamental nature and purpose of a PAGA action, the Court finds this analogy persuasive. The aggrieved employees assert -- as a unified group -- a claim on behalf of the State, in furtherance of the LWDA's reach and ultimately for the benefit of the public. The representative plaintiff in a PAGA action derives his or her right to sue from the statute and acts as proxy for the LWDA, such that the aggrieved employees' claims are "common and undivided," rather than separate and distinct. The fact that the aggrieved employees receive 25 percent of the total civil penalties while the LWDA receives 75 percent does not render the individual claims in a PAGA action separate and distinct. See Eagle, 769 F.2d at 547 n.4 (noting that the shareholders intended pro rata division of the total fund did not render their claims separate and distinct, as "it is proper to aggregate the value of jointly held rights when several plaintiffs sue to enforce a common and undivided interest which is separate and distinct as between themselves") (internal citation and quotes omitted). The division of the civil penalties only highlights the primary public focus of a PAGA action. See Thomas, 2011 WL 2173715, at *18.
This Court agrees with the Thomas court and finds that the amount in controversy in a PAGA claim is predicated on the total amount of civil penalties sought by the aggrieved employees.*fn11 Consequently, the Court finds that the claims by the aggrieved employees in this action may be aggregated, and Defendants have shown more likely than not that the total civil penalties in the amount of $9,409,550.00 well exceeds the jurisdictional threshold.*fn12
Having determined that this action was properly removed, the Court now turns to Defendants' motion to compel arbitration. The issue before the Court is whether the Agreement, which includes a PAGA arbitration waiver, is enforceable under federal and California law. The Court finds that because the PAGA arbitration waiver contradicts the fundamental purpose of a representative enforcement action under PAGA, it is unconscionable and unenforceable.
The Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA") provides that a "written provision in any . . . contract evidencing a transaction involving commerce to settle by arbitration a controversy thereafter arising out of such contract . . . shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of the contract." 9 U.S.C. § 2. The FAA reflects both a "liberal federal policy favoring arbitration" and the "fundamental principle that arbitration is a matter of contract." AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, __ U.S. __, 131 S. Ct.1740, 1745 (2011); see also Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams, 279 F.3d 889, 892 (9th Cir. 2002) (the FAA not only places arbitration agreements on equal footing with other contracts, but also establishes a federal policy in favor of arbitration).
In deciding whether to enforce an arbitration agreement, the court must determine "(1) whether a valid agreement to arbitration exists and, if it does, (2) whether the agreement encompasses the dispute." Cox v. Ocean View Hotel Corp., 533 F.3d 1114, 1119 (9th Cir. 2008) (internal citation and quotes omitted); see also 9 U.S.C. § 2. Determining the validity of an arbitration agreement is a question of contract interpretation and thus governed by state law. Circuit City Stores, 279 F.3d at 892. Nevertheless, the FAA only "permits arbitration agreements to be declared unenforceable 'upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.' " AT&T, 131 S. Ct. at 1746 (quoting 9 U.S.C. § 2). "When state law prohibits outright the arbitration of a particular type of claim, the analysis is straightforward: The conflicting rule is displaced by the FAA." Id. at 1747. But "when a doctrine normally thought to be generally applicable, such as duress or . . . unconscionability, is alleged to have been applied in a fashion that disfavors arbitration," the inquiry becomes more complex. Id. "[A] court may not 'rely on the uniqueness of an agreement to arbitrate as a basis for a state-law holding that enforcement would be unconscionable, for this would enable the court to effect what . . . the state legislature cannot.' " Id. at 1747 (quoting Perry v. Thomas, 482 U.S. 483, 493 n.9 (1987)).
B. Unconscionability of the PAGA Arbitration Waiver
The parties do not dispute that both the FAA and California contract law apply to the instant action or that they executed a written arbitration agreement. Defendants, however, contend that Plaintiff agreed to resolve all claims arising under his employment in binding arbitration pursuant to the Agreement, which Defendants claim is valid under California law. Defendants further contend that the PAGA arbitration waiver in the Agreement and DRP are not unconscionable in light of the recent United States Supreme Court decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion. The Court disagrees.
Under California law, courts may refuse to enforce a contract where, at the time of its formation, it was unconscionable, or may limit the application of any unconscionable clause. Cal. Civ. Code § 1670.5(a). A finding of unconscionability has both a procedural and substantive component. See Armendariz v. Found. Health Psychcare Servs., Inc., 24 Cal. 4th 83, 114 (2000). While procedural unconscionability focuses on the element of " 'oppression' or 'surprise' due to unequal bargaining power," substantive unconscionability centers on an " 'overly harsh,' or 'one-sided' results.' " Id. Defendants argue that the PAGA arbitration waiver in the Agreement is not unconscionable under AT&T, which Defendants claim invalidates Franco v. Athens Disposal Co., 171 Cal. App. 4th 1277, 1303 (2009), holding that PAGA waivers are unenforceable. In Franco, plaintiff, a nonexempt hourly employee, brought a class action suit against his former employer, seeking civil penalties under PAGA, among other things. 171 Cal. App. 4th at1283. The defendant moved to compel arbitration pursuant to a written arbitration agreement, which provided, as in this case, that the parties " 'waive any right to join or consolidate claims in arbitration with others or to make claims in arbitration as a representative or as a member of a class or in a private attorney general capacity. . . .' " Id. at 1284. In other words, the parties could arbitrate their individual claims, but not any class-action or representative PAGA claims. The California appellate court held that the waiver clause was unconscionable because, inter alia, the provision expressly prohibited the plaintiff's ability to collect civil penalties in a representative capacity, thereby preventing plaintiff "from performing the core function of a private attorney general" and undermining the very purpose and nature of a PAGA enforcement action aimed at protecting the public and penalizing the employer for past illegal conduct. Id. at 1300, 1303. The court found the arbitration agreement, which contained the invalid PAGA arbitration, "tainted with illegality," and thus unenforceable. Id. at 1303. The court subsequently denied defendant's motion to compel arbitration and ordered the action to proceed in a court of law. Id.
Here, Defendants argue that the Franco decision is invalid under AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion. However, the Franco court did not outright prohibit arbitration of a PAGA claim, but instead ruled that a PAGA waiver was unconscionable because it undercut the fundamental purpose of a PAGA action. A PAGA waiver is unconscionable because it both deprives the individual of the right to bring a representative action and deprives the LWDA the benefits of the enforcement action brought by aggrieved employees. Thus, to the extent that the Franco court invalidated the PAGA waiver on the basis of unconscionability, the decision is consistent with the rule applied in AT&T. Furthermore, the facts upon which the Supreme Court based its decision in AT&T are readily distinguishable from those in the instant action. In AT&T, customers brought a putative class action in federal court against a telephone company, alleging, among other things, that the company engaged in false advertising and fraud in connection with the sale and service of cellphones. 131 S. Ct. at 1744. The cellphone contract between the plaintiffs and the company contained a class action waiver clause, which required that all claims be brought in the parties' "individual capacity, and not as a plaintiff or class member in any purported class or representative proceeding." Id. (internal citation and quotes omitted). The telephone company moved to compel arbitration, which was denied by the district court because it found the cellphone agreement unconscionable under Discovery Bank v. Superior Court, 36 Cal. 4th 148, 162--63 (2005), holding class action arbitration waivers in contracts of adhesion involving disputes over small amounts of money to be unconscionable. Id. at 1744--45. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision, finding that the class action waiver was unconscionable under California law, and that the Discovery Bank rule was not preempted by the FAA, "because that rule was simply 'a refinement of the unconscionability analysis applicable to contracts generally in California.' " Id. at 1745 (quoting Laster v. AT & T Mobility LLC, 584 F.3d 849, 857 (9th Cir. 2009)). The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the Discovery Bank rule, to the extent that it allowed for and mandated the availability of class arbitration, was inconsistent with the FAA, which was designed to ensure the enforcement of arbitration agreements according to their terms so as to facilitate streamlined proceedings. Id. at 131 S. Ct. at 1748, 1750--51. Specifically, the Supreme Court found that requiring class arbitration is inconsistent with the FAA because (1) class arbitration sacrifices the informality characteristic of arbitral proceedings, thereby rending arbitration slower and more costly; (2) class arbitration requires procedural formality to the extent not envisioned by Congress when it passed the FAA, and (3) class arbitration greatly increases risks to defendants in high-stakes class proceedings because errors would not be subject to appellate review. Id. at 1751--52.
In the instant case, however, Defendants do not explain how AT&T applies to a nonclass PAGA claim at issue here. Although not cited by Defendants, the district court's recent decision in Quevedo v. Macy's, Inc., __ F. Supp. 2d __, No. CV 09-1522, 2011 WL 3135052, at *17 (C.D. Cal. June 16, 2011) affords some support for Defendants' position. In Quevedo, the district court found Franco no longer tenable under AT&T, concluding that the arbitration of a representative PAGA action would, like a class claim, require a more cumbersome and costlier process in contravention to the streamlined, informal arbitral process envisioned by the FAA, and because there is also the increased risk that erroneous decisions on a PAGA claim would go uncorrected. 2011 WL 3135052, at *17. Just as arbitration is inappropriate for high-stakes class action claims, arbitration is a fortiori ill-suited for a representative action, which is intended to protect the public's interest. See id.
But as Plaintiff correctly notes, AT&T concerned the enforceability of a consumer class action arbitration waiver, rather than a representative PAGA claim waiver. (Pls.' Opp. at 21 (citing Brown v. Ralphs Grocery Co., 197 Cal. App. 4th 489, 500 (2011); Plows v. Rockwell Collin, Inc., No. SACV 10-01936, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88781, at *14--*15 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 2011)).) In Brown, the California appellate court refused to extend AT&T to a PAGA action in light of the fundamental nature and purpose of a PAGA claim. Brown, 197 Cal. App. 4th at 500--03; see also Plows, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88781, at *14--*15. Specifically, the Brown court explained that the purpose of PAGA "contrasts with the private individual right of a consumer to pursue class action remedies in court or arbitration, which right, according to AT&T may be waived by agreement so as not to frustrate the FAA -- a law governing private arbitration. AT&T does not provide that a public right, such as that created under the PAGA, can be waived if such a waiver is contrary to state law." Brown, 197 Cal. App. 4th at 500. Furthermore, as noted by the Brown court, the Quevedo court failed to take into account that there are no separate individual claims in a PAGA action; rather, the individual must bring a PAGA claim as a representative action on behalf of himself and other aggrieved employees. See id. at 503 n.8.*fn13 The Court finds the reasoning offered by the Brown court persuasive. See also Plows, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 88781, at *14--*15 (agreeing with the Brown court's reasoning of why class action waivers in arbitration agreements may not be used to divest plaintiffs of their right to bring representative actions under PAGA and denying defendant's motion to compel arbitration of plaintiffs' PAGA claims). Because the PAGA arbitration waiver in the Agreement is unconscionable, and the waiver taints the entirety of the Agreement with illegality, the Court deems the Agreement unenforceable. *fn14
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's motion to remand is DENIED, and Defendants' motion to compel arbitration is also DENIED.
Our website includes the main text of the court's opinion but does not include the
docket number, case citation or footnotes. Upon purchase, docket numbers and/or
citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a legal proceeding.
Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision.
Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.
Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.
LRC, Inc. About Us


text:
The Authentic Wild West; The Gunfighters.
HORAN, James D.
• Terms • Ask a Question
Place Published: New York
Publisher: Crown
Date Published: 1976
Description: Many Illus. 4to, 1/2 brown cloth, d.w. slightly chipped and lightly soiled. New York: Crown, (1976).Jacket: Y
Binding: hardcover
Condition: very good
Language: English
Type: Books
Book ID: 252828


text:
Richard M. Sherman
9,462pages onAdd New Page
this wiki
this wiki
Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you've made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
Richard M. Sherman composed the song Make Way for Tomorrow for Iron Man 2.
- Richard M. Sherman was chosen to compose the theme song for the Stark Expo to give them the same feeling he did while composing "It's a Small World (After All)" with his late brother for the 1964 New York World's Fair.


text:
Wordsmith Talk
|About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us
You are not logged in. [Log In] Wordsmith.org » Forums » General Topics » Weekly Themes » Soubrette Register User Forum List Calendar Active Topics Search FAQ
Topic Options
#198953 - 04/09/11 09:52 PM Soubrette
Registered: 09/17/10
Posts: 3
Back in the '50s or early '60s, there was a line of "Misses" clothing intended for teenagers called "Sue Brett". It may have been a Sears or Wards catalog line. I thought it was a clever play on words, but none of my friends 'got it'>
#198955 - 04/09/11 09:59 PM Re: Soubrette [Re: loisart]
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 03/15/00
Posts: 11613
Loc: Louisville, Kentucky
Welcome, lois. Em...I'm afraid I don't get it, either, though I was around, then. What is (a?) soubrette, please?
Never mind--just checked my W's A D all the way back to Monday. Sorry--we've been having a family crisis this week.
Was this line a deliberate homophone, do you know?
#198964 - 04/09/11 11:20 PM Re: Soubrette [Re: Jackie]
Registered: 09/21/10
Posts: 1706
Loc: down under
Jackie...I didn't know either. I was thinking along the lines of 'brat' and teenager, so I LIU. soubrette
Ah...now I get it. Good one Lois
#198979 - 04/10/11 11:58 AM Re: Soubrette [Re: Candy]
Carpal Tunnel
Registered: 06/23/08
Posts: 8526
Loc: Land of the Flat Water
----please, draw me a sheep----
Moderator: Jackie
Forum Stats 8963 Members
16 Forums
13869 Topics
222484 Posts
Max Online: 3341 @ 12/09/11 02:15 PM
Newest Members Joe_Lee, David_Lee, soulsurvivor, DavidLaurence, Hal_Al
8963 Registered Users
Who's Online 0 registered (), 20 Guests and 3 Spiders online. Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters (30 Days)
wofahulicodoc 48 LukeJavan8 30 may2point0 25 delirium 4 DavidLaurence 1 Curtis 1
Top Posters
wwh 13858 Faldage 13803 Jackie 11613 tsuwm 10538 LukeJavan8 8525 Buffalo Shrdlu 7210 wofahulicodoc 6924 AnnaStrophic 6511 Wordwind 6296 of troy 5400
Board Rules · Mark all read Contact Us · Wordsmith.org · Top
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site. Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.
Home | Today's Word | Yesterday's Word | Subscribe | FAQ | Archives | Search | Feedback
Wordsmith Talk | Wordsmith Chat
© 1994-2016 Wordsmith