David Ramirez v. Rite Aid Corporation, No. 2:2020cv03531 - Document 73 (C.D. Cal. 2022)

Court Description: FINAL JUDGMENT by Judge George H. Wu. IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT: 1. Subject to the Court's order granting final approval of Class Action and PAGA Representative Settlement, the Court hereby dismisses with prejudice the Action. 2. W ithout affecting the finality of this Judgment, the Court reserves jurisdiction over the implementation, administration and enforcement of this Judgment and the Settlement, and all matters ancillary thereto. 3. The Court finding that no reason exists for delay in ordering final judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), the clerk is hereby directed to enter this Judgment forthwith. (aco)

Download PDF
David Ramirez v. Rite Aid Corporation Doc. 73 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 DAVID RAMIREZ and MARION Case No. CV 20-3531-GW-SKx LEMONS, on behalf of themselves and all (Consolidated with Case No. CV 20others similarly situated, 7617-GW-SKx) Plaintiffs, 11 FINAL JUDGMENT 12 vs. 13 RITE AID CORPORATION, THRIFTY PAYLESS, INC., and DOES 1-10, inclusive. 14 15 Defendants. Date: May 5, 2022 Time: 8:30 a.m. Courtroom: 9D Judge: Hon. George H. Wu Date Action Filed: April 16, 2020 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 _________________________________________________________________________________ [PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT David Ramirez, et al. v. Rite Aid Corporation, et al. Dockets.Justia.com 1 IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT: 2 1. Subject to the Court’s order granting final approval of Class Action and 3 PAGA Representative Settlement, the Court hereby dismisses with prejudice the 4 Action. 5 2. Without affecting the finality of this Judgment, the Court reserves 6 jurisdiction over the implementation, administration and enforcement of this 7 Judgment and the Settlement, and all matters ancillary thereto. 8 3. The Court finding that no reason exists for delay in ordering final 9 judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), the clerk is hereby 10 directed to enter this Judgment forthwith. 11 12 LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED. 13 Dated: June 28, 2022 14 ______________________________ 15 HON. GEORGE H. WU, United States District Judge 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 _________________________________________________________________________________ 1 [PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT Ramirez, et al. v. Rite Aid Corporation, et al. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Submitted by: Carolyn Hunt Cottrell (SBN 166977) Ori Edelstein (SBN 268145) Kristabel Sandoval (SBN 323714) SCHNEIDER WALLACE COTTRELL KONECKY LLP 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1400 Emeryville, California 94608 Tel: (415) 421-7100 Fax: (415) 421-7105 ccottrell@Schneiderwallace.com oedelstein@Schneiderwallace.com ksandoval@schneiderwallace.com Randall B. Aiman-Smith (SBN 124599) Reed W.L. Marcy (SBN 191531) Hallie Von Rock (SBN 233152) AIMAN-SMITH & MARCY PC 7677 Oakport St. Suite 1150 Oakland, CA 94621 Tel: (510) 817-2711 Fax: (510) 562-6830 ras@asmlawyers.com rwlm@asmlawyers.com hvr@asmlawyers.com 14 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and on behalf of 15 others similarly situated 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 _________________________________________________________________________________ 2 [PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT Ramirez, et al. v. Rite Aid Corporation, et al.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.