Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Manuel Lara, et al. v. San Bernardino Steel Inc.

September 20, 2011

MANUEL LARA, ET AL.
v.
SAN BERNARDINO STEEL INC., ET AL.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Percy Anderson, United States District Judge

JS-6

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

Present: The

Honorable

Paul Songco Not Reported N/A

Deputy Clerk Court Reporter Tape No.

Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs: Attorneys Present for Defendants:

None None

Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS - COURT ORDER

Before the Court is a Notice of Removal filed by defendant San Bernardino Steel on August 25, 2011. (Docket No. 1.)

I. Background

This action arises out of Plaintiffs' allegations that Defendant San Bernardino Steel, Inc. committed a number of violations of the California Labor Code by failing to pay overtime, provide itemized wage statements, pay employees upon termination, provide meal and rest breaks, pay wages, and provide and maintain tools and equipment. Plaintiffs are bringing this putative class action on behalf of current and former hourly workers employed by Defendant in the State of California.

Plaintiffs commenced this action by filing a Class Action Complaint in San Bernardino County Superior Court. Defendant removed the action to this Court, and was assigned case number ED CV 11-0344 PA (Ex). Defendant's Notice of Removal asserted federal question jurisdiction based on Plaintiffs' production of certain collective bargaining agreements ("CBAs") in response to Defendant's document requests. Defendant alleged that Plaintiffs' claims were preempted by the Labor Management Relations Act ("LMRA") because the Court must interpret the collective bargaining agreements in evaluating their merits. On May 16, 2010, this Court granted Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand because Defendant did not meet its burden to demonstrate this Court's federal question jurisdiction.

This is the second time that Defendant has filed a Notice of Removal for the same complaint. Defendant, once again, asserts that this Court has subject matter jurisdiction on the basis of federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331. Defendant asserts that, during a July 26, 2011 deposition, plaintiff Juanito Lara identified the CBAs as the contracts that were allegedly breached, and ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.