Lusardi Construction Company vs. Causey

2. Litigation costs in the amount of $20,708.

3. Administration costs in the amount of $148,590.

4. An enhancement of $5000 to Plaintiff Saldivar Torres.

5. The amount remaining is to be distributed between the LWDA and the aggrieved employees as provided in the parties’ settlement agreement.

Please submit a revised proposed order for the Court’s signature that conforms to the foregoing. 4 Lusardi Construction Company vs. Causey

2025-01498620 Kathleen I. Carrington’s Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vicex Jennifer "Ginger" M. Busby’s Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice The unopposed applications of Kathleen I. Carrington and Jennifer “Ginger” M. Busby for pro hac vice admission are GRANTED. The applications comply with the requirements of CRC 9.40. 5 Ojeda vs. Talent4Health, LLC

2025-01504409

Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration Case Management Conference Defendant Talent4Health, LLC’s motion to compel arbitration of Plaintiff Licha Ojeda’s claims is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ordered to arbitrate the individual portion of her PAGA claim pursuant to the parties’ agreement. The non-individual portion of her PAGA claim is stayed pending completion of arbitration. An arbitration review conference will take place on April 28, 2027 at 8:30 a.m. in Department CX-101. GROUNDS FOR RULING I. Existence of Agreement

A. Standard of Review The moving party bears the burden of proving the existence of an arbitration agreement by the preponderance of the evidence. (Gamboa v. Northeast Community Clinic (2021) 72 Cal.App.5th 158, 164.) But the burden of production shifts in a three-step process. (Id., at p. 165.) “First, the moving party bears the burden of producing ‘prima facie evidence of a written agreement to arbitrate the controversy.’ [Citation.] The moving party ‘can meet its initial burden by attaching to the [motion or] petition a copy of the arbitration agreement purporting to bear the [opposing party’s] signature.’” (Ibid.) “If the moving party meets its initial prima facie burden and the opposing party disputes the agreement, then in the second step, the opposing party bears the burden of producing evidence to challenge the authenticity of the agreement. [Citation.]

The opposing party can do this in several ways. For example, the opposing party may testify under oath or declare under penalty of perjury that the party never saw or does not remember seeing the agreement, or that the party never signed or does not remember signing the agreement.” (Ibid.) “If the opposing party meets its burden of producing evidence, then in the third step, the moving party must establish with admissible evidence a valid arbitration agreement between the parties. The burden of proving the agreement by a preponderance of the evidence remains with the moving party.” (Id., at pp. 165-166.)