Free Motion to Strike - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-02218-LAB-RBB

Document 16

Filed 05/16/2008

Page 1 of 3

1 DECLUES, BURKETT & THOMPSON, LLP EXEMPTFRoM FEES PER: GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 6103 Attorneys at Law 2 JEFFREY P. THONIPSON, Esq. (State Bar No. 136713) JENNIFER K. BERNEKING, Esq. (State Bar No. 167112) 3 17011 Beach Blvd., Ste. 400 Huntington Beach, CA 92647-7455 4 Phone: (714) 843-9444 Fax: (714) 843-9452 5 e-mail address:[email protected] 6
7

Attorneys for Defendants, CITY OF IMPERIAL (a public entity) and MIGUEL COLON (employee ofa public entity) . UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

10 11 12 13 JOHN ESPINOZA, an individual,
Plaintiff,

CASE NO.: 07CV2218 LAB (RBB)
Complaint Filed: 11/20/07 Judge Larry A. Burns Courtroom 9

vs.

14 CITY OF IMPERIAL, a public entity; MIGUEL COLON, an individual; IRA DEFENDANT CITY OF IMPERIAL 15 GROSSMAN, an individual; and DOES AND MIGUEL COLON'S NOTICE OF ANTI-SLAPP MOTION 1 THROUGH 50, inclusive, 16 ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED Defendants. 17 Date: July 14, 2008 Time: 11:15 a.m. 18 Courtroom: 9 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28

TO ALL PARTIES AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on July 14, 2008, at 11:15 a.m., before the Honorable Larry A. Bums, Courtroom 9, United States District Courthouse, 940 Front Street, San Diego, California, defendants CITY OF INIPERIAL (a public entity) and MIGUEL COLON (employee of a public entity), will and hereby do move to strike the First Amended Complaint filed by plaintiff JOHN ESPINOZA pursuant to the California Anti-SLAPP Statute. This Motion is based upon Section 425.16 of the California Code of Civil
Procedure, as is brought on the grounds that: 1) Defendants CITY and COLON's free

CASE NO.: 07CV2218 LAB (RBB)

Case 3:07-cv-02218-LAB-RBB

Document 16

Filed 05/16/2008

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

speech rights are implicated by plaintiffs First Amended Complaint and 2)

Plaintiff

cannot establish that there is a reasonable probability that he will prevail on his claims against the CITY and/or COLON. Specifically, defendants CITY and COLON seek to strike the following causes of action: 1) Third cause of action for disability/medical condition discrimination under

FEHA; 2) Fourth cause of action for failure to accommodate under FEHA; 3) Fifth cause of action for harassment under ADA and FEHA; 4) Sixth cause of action for retaliation under ADA and FEHA; 5) Ninth cause of action for invasion of privacy; 6) Tenth cause of action for wrongful termination in violation of public policy; 7) Eleventh cause of action for defamation; 8) Twelfth cause of action for blacklisting; and 9) Thirteenth cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. This Motion is based upon the Memorandum of Points and Authorities filed concurrently herewith, the pleadings and records on file herein, and on any additional evidence argument or authorities that may be presented at the hearing on this Motion.

Dated: May 16, 2008

DECLUES, BURKETT & THOMPSON, LLP

BY:s/J.

JEF REY P. THOMPSON, Esq. JENNIFER K. BERNEKING Esq .. Attorneys for Defendants, CITY OF IMPERIAL, (a public entity) and MIGUEL COLON (employee of a public entity)

Thom~son

26
27 28

CASE NO.: 07CV2218 LAB (RBB)

Case 3:07-cv-02218-LAB-RBB

Document 16

Filed 05/16/2008

Page 3 of 3

1

2
3 4
5

PROOF OF SERVICE (C.C.P. section 1013a(3))
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ORANGE

~ SS.

6
7

I am over fu.~J:l.ge of 18 and I am not a pat!Y to the within action. I am employed by DECLUES, BURKETT & THOMPSON, LLP, in the County of Orange, at 17011 Beach Blvd., Ste. 400, Huntington Beach, California, 92647-5995. On May 16, 2008, I served the attached: DEFENDANT CITY OF IMPERIAL AND MIGUEL COLON'S NOTICE OF ANTI-SLAPP MOTION On the interested parties in this action by: XXX Placing true copies thereof in sealed envelopes, addressed as described below. Vincent J. Tien Law Offices of Vincent J. Tien 17291 Irvine Blvd., Suite 150 Tustin, CA 92780 White, Oliver & Amundson
550 West C Street, Suite 950
San Diego, CA 92101
(619) 23-9-0300


8

9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

XXX BY MAIL: I am "readily familiar" with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice; it would be deposited with the United States Postal Service on that same day, witn postage thereon fully prepaid at Huntington Beach, California, in the ordinary course ofbusiness. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one Clay after date of deposit for mailing an affidavit. BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I caused such an envelope to be delivered by hand to the offices of the addressees. BY FEDERAL EXPRESS (Receipt/Airbill No.: )

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

BY FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION: From FAX NO. (714) 843-9452 to FAX No.: at or about Time, directed to Name. The facsimile machine I used complied with Rule 2003(3), and no error was reported by the machine. Pursuant to Rule 2005(I), I caused the machine to print a record of the transmission, a copy of which is attached to this declaration. XXX FEDERAL: I declare I am employed in the office of a member of the Bar of this Court at whose direction the service was made. I declare, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the above is true and correct. Executed on May 16, 2008, at Hunti

CASE NO.: 07CV2218 LAB (RBB)