Clearpath Lending v. Bose CA4/3

Filed 8/14/20 Clearpath Lending v. Bose CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

CLEARPATH LENDING, INC. et al.,

Plaintiffs and Respondents, G058370

v. (Super. Ct. No. 30-2019-01052326)

SEAN BOSE, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, William D. Claster, Judge. Appeal dismissed. Epstein Becker & Green, Richard J. Frey, Susan Graham, and Adriana Galindo for Plaintiffs and Respondents. Jones, Bell, Abbott, Fleming & Fitzgerald, William M. Turner, Asha Dhillon, Catherine L. Dellecker for Defendant and Appellant.

In this employment dispute, Sean Bose appeals from the trial court’s prejudgment order compelling arbitration of his individual claims, dismissing his class claims, and staying his representative claim pursuant to the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (PAGA; Lab. Code, § 2698 et seq.) pending arbitration on his individual claims. We conclude the order is nonappealable and dismiss the appeal. FACTS Bose worked for Clearpath as a loan originator. As part of his employment agreement with Clearpath, Bose signed an agreement to arbitrate. Clearpath terminated Bose in July 2018. In February 2019, Clearpath filed suit against Bose for breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, violation of the Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200) (UCL), and falsifying timesheets in violation of Labor Code sections 2856 and 2863. Bose filed a cross-complaint against Clearpath and two of its employees (collectively referred to as Clearpath) for individual causes of action for retaliation, discrimination, and wrongful termination; and individual and class wage-and-hour and expense-reimbursement causes of action. Bose’s class action claims included a UCL claim. Bose later amended his cross-complaint to include a PAGA claim based upon the 1 same underlying allegations in his initial complaint. One and one-half months after Clearpath filed suit, it submitted an arbitration demand to Bose. Clearpath offered to stipulate to move the claims in its complaint to arbitration. Bose claimed Clearpath had waived the arbitration provision and refused to submit his claims to arbitration. He did not respond to Clearpath’s stipulation offer.