Radcliff v. San Diego Gas & Electric Company

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 DAVID RADCLIFF, individually and on Case No.: 20-cv-1555-H-MSB behalf of others similarly situated and 11 aggrieved, ORDER PENDING MANDATE 12 HEARING Plaintiff,

13 v. 14 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC 15 COMPANY, a California corporation; SEMPRA ENERGY, a California 16 corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, 17 inclusive, 18 Defendants. 19 20 On November 20, 2023, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 21 reversed this Court’s decision to dismiss Plaintiff David Radcliff’s (“Plaintiff”) 22 representative1 claim for penalties under the California Private Attorneys General Act 23 24

25 1 For the purposes of this order, the Court uses the term “individual” PAGA claims to 26 mean claims that are premised on California Labor Code violations “actually sustained by 27 the plaintiff” and “representative” PAGA claims to mean those claims “arising out of events involving other employees.” See Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S.Ct. 28 1 || (“PAGA”) and remanded the case to this Court “for proceedings consistent with the parties’ 2 ||joint motion.” (Doc. No. 63.) 3 The Court issues this Order pending the forthcoming Ninth Circuit mandate and 4 ||subsequent mandate hearing to be held in this Court. Pursuant to the Ninth Circuit’s 5 || instructions and the parties’ joint motion, the Court (1) reinstates Plaintiff's representative 6 || PAGA claim’; (2) orders the parties to arbitrate Plaintiff's individual PAGA claim; and (3) 7 stays the representative PAGA claim pending the outcome of the arbitration of all of 8 || Plaintiff's individual claims. Joint Stipulation and Proposed Order at 3, David Radcliff v. 9 ||San Diego Gas & Electric Company; Sempra Energy, No. 22-55940 (9th Cir. 2023) (Doc. 10 || No. 34); see also Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 14 Cal.5th 1104 (2023); Rocha v. U- 11 || Haul of California, 88 Cal.App.S5th 65, 77-78 (2023). The Court will schedule a telephonic 12 status conference once the Ninth Circuit issues its mandate. 13 IT IS SO ORDERED. 14 ||DATED: November 28, 2023 \ lu | 15 Miualen be dhaf » UPA MARILYN &. HUFF, Seniorésfrict Judge 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 a7Hho0C~Ci“‘ 28 * Plaintiff's PAGA claim is the eleventh cause of action in his Complaint. (Doc. No. 1-2; Compl. {| 68-71.)