Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Motion to Dismiss — In re BofA Unemployment Litigation (Dkt. 84-2)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California · No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB · Doc. 84-2 · 2021-10-01 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 
ISO MOTION TO DISMISS 
 
CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB 
 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
JAMES W. MCGARRY (pro hac vice) 
JMcGarry@goodwinlaw.com 
YVONNE W. CHAN (pro hac vice) 
YChan@goodwinlaw.com 
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP 
100 Northern Avenue 
Boston, MA  02210 
Tel.: +1 617 570 1000 
Fax: +1 617 523 1231 
Attorneys for Defendant  
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 
[ADDITIONAL COUNSEL LISTED IN SIGNATURE BLOCK] 
 
 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA –  
SAN DIEGO DIVISION 
IN RE: BANK OF AMERICA 
CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT 
BENEFITS LITIGATION 
Case No. 21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB 
 
DEFENDANT BANK OF 
AMERICA, N.A.’S REQUEST FOR 
JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT 
OF MOTION TO DISMISS 
MASTER CONSOLIDATED 
COMPLAINT PURSUANT TO 
FED. R. CIV. P. 12(B)(1) AND 
12(B)(6) 
 
Date:   
January 10, 2022 
Time: 
11:30 a.m. 
Ctrm:  
14A – 14th Floor 
Judge:   
Hon. Larry Alan Burns 
 
Filed/Lodged Concurrently with: 
1. Notice of Motion & Motion 
2. Memorandum 
3. Declaration of Robert Chestnut 
4. Declaration of Shane Daniels 
5. [Proposed] Order 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 84-2     Filed 10/01/21     PageID.603     Page 1
of 9

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 
ISO MOTION TO DISMISS 
1 
CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 201 and supporting case law, Defendant 
Bank of America, N.A. (“BANA” or “Bank of America”), requests that this Court 
take judicial notice of the following documents in connection with Bank of America’s 
Motion to Dismiss the Master Consolidated Complaint (“MCC”) pursuant to Federal 
Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6): 
1.
Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Robert Chestnut:  A true and correct
copy of the California Employment Development Department Debit Card
Account Agreement, expressly incorporated into the MCC by reference.  This
document is authenticated by the Declaration of Robert Chestnut filed
concurrently with this request.
2.
Exhibit 2 to the Declaration of Robert Chestnut:  A true and correct
copy of excerpts of the agreement between BANA and the California
Employment Development Department (the “EDD Agreement”), expressly
incorporated into the MCC by reference.  This document is authenticated by
the Declaration of Robert Chestnut filed concurrently with this request.
3.
Exhibit 3 to the Declaration of Robert Chestnut:  A true and correct
copy of excerpts of the August 24, 2020 letter agreement between BANA and
the California Employment Development Department which temporarily
modifies the EDD Agreement, and thus is also incorporated by reference.  This
document is authenticated by the Declaration of Robert Chestnut filed
concurrently with this request.
Dated:   October 1, 2021
Respectfully submitted, 
By: 
LAURA A. STOLL (SBN 255023)
LStoll@goodwinlaw.com 
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP 
601 South Figueroa Street, 41st Floor 
s/ Yvonne W. Chan
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 84-2     Filed 10/01/21     PageID.604     Page 2
of 9

REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 
ISO MOTION TO DISMISS 
2 
CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
Los Angeles, California  90017
Tel.: +1 213 426 2500 
Fax: +1 213 623 1673 
JAMES W. MCGARRY (pro hac vice) 
JMcGarry@goodwinlaw.com 
YVONNE W. CHAN (pro hac vice) 
YChan@goodwinlaw.com 
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP 
100 Northern Avenue 
Boston, MA  02210 
Tel.: +1 617 570 1000 
Fax: +1 617 523 1231 
THOMAS M. HEFFERON (pro hac vice) 
THefferon@goodwinlaw.com 
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP 
1900 N St. NW  
Washington, DC 20036  
Tel: +1 202 346 4000  
Fax: +1 202 346 4444 
JANICE P. BROWN (SBN 114433) 
jbrown@myersnave.com 
ARLENE R. YANG (SBN 297450) 
ayang@myersnave.com 
MEYERS NAVE 
600 B Street, Suite 1650 
San Diego, CA 92101 
BARRY W. LEE (SBN 088685) 
bwlee@manatt.com  
MANATT PHELPS & PHILLIPS LLP 
One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor  
San Francisco, CA 94111  
Tel.: +1 415 291 7450  
Fax: +1 415 291 7474 
Attorneys for Defendant 
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 84-2     Filed 10/01/21     PageID.605     Page 3
of 9

MPA ISO REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 
ISO MOTION TO DISMISS 
3 
CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 
On a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), 
“courts must consider the complaint in its entirety, as well as other sources courts 
ordinarily examine when ruling on Rule 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss, in particular, 
… matters of which a court may take judicial notice.”  Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues 
& Rights, Ltd., 551 U.S. 308, 322 (2007).  Federal Rule of Evidence 201 authorizes 
the Court to “judicially notice a fact that is not subject to reasonable dispute because 
it: (1) is generally known within the trial court’s territorial jurisdiction; or (2) can be 
accurately and readily determined from sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably 
be questioned.”  Fed. R. Evid. 201(b). 
It has been long recognized that a court may “consider a document if the 
plaintiff refers extensively to the document or the document forms the basis of the 
plaintiffs claim.”  Steinle v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco, 919 F.3d 1154, 1162-63 
(9th Cir. 2019) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).  This “incorporation 
by reference” doctrine provides a defendant the opportunity to submit additional 
documents outside of the complaint for the court’s consideration and denies a 
plaintiff the ability to mischaracterize key documents through selective quotation.  
Khoja v. Orexigen Therapeutics, Inc., 899 F.3d 988, 1002 (9th Cir. 2018) (the 
judicially-created doctrine of incorporation by reference “prevents plaintiffs from 
selecting only portions of documents that support their claims, while omitting 
portions of those very documents that weaken—or doom—their claims.”). 
The Ninth Circuit has “extended the ‘incorporation by reference’ doctrine to 
situations in which the plaintiff’s claim depends on the contents of a document, the 
defendant attaches the document to its motion to dismiss, and the parties do not 
dispute the authenticity of the document, even though the plaintiff does not explicitly 
allege the contents of that document in the complaint.”  Knievel v. ESPN, 393 F.3d 
1068, 1076 (9th Cir. 2005).  A court “may treat such a document as part of the 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 84-2     Filed 10/01/21     PageID.606     Page 4
of 9

MPA ISO REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 
ISO MOTION TO DISMISS 
4 
CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
complaint, and thus may assume that its contents are true for purposes of a motion to 
dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).”  Ritchie, 342 F.3d at 908.   
Each of the following exhibits is the proper subject of judicial notice because 
it is referred to in detail in the Master Consolidated Complaint (“MCC”) and forms 
the basis for several of Plaintiffs’ causes of action.   
Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Robert Chestnut (“Chestnut Decl.”) 
Exhibit 1 to the Chestnut Decl. is a true and complete copy of the California 
Employment Development Department Debit Card Account Agreement (the 
“Account Agreement”), which discloses the terms and conditions of recipients’ 
California Employment Development Department Debit Card.  The Account 
Agreement is extensively referenced throughout the MCC.  See MCC ¶¶ 70-71, 94,  
441, 452, 475, 497, 531, 604–08.  The Account Agreement forms the basis for 
Plaintiffs’ claims for breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good 
faith and fair dealing.  See id. ¶ 608 (alleging that BANA violated the Account 
Agreement); id. ¶ [].  The Account Agreement also forms the basis for Plaintiffs’ 
Unfair Competition Law claim.  See id. ¶ 577 (alleging that BANA committed 
fraudulent acts against Plaintiffs by “failing to adequately investigate and resolve 
Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ claims of unauthorized transactions in a timely 
manner despite the Bank’s promised ‘Zero Liability’ policy for unauthorized 
transactions”).   
Good cause exists to take judicial notice of Account Agreement because it 
forms the basis for three of Plaintiffs’ causes of action and is, thus, incorporated by 
reference.  MCC ¶¶ 577, 608, 621; Ritchie, 342 F.3d at 908; Khoja, 899 F.3d at 1002. 
Good cause also exists to take judicial notice of Account Agreement because the 
MCC makes extensive references to, and directly quotes from, text contained in the 
document.  See, e.g., MCC ¶¶ 70-73, 99, 605-06; Steinle, 919 F.3d at 1162-63.  
Additionally, good cause exists to take judicial notice of the Account Agreement 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 84-2     Filed 10/01/21     PageID.607     Page 5
of 9

MPA ISO REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 
ISO MOTION TO DISMISS 
5 
CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
because Plaintiffs cannot credibly dispute the authenticity of this document, as its 
contents bear directly on the existence and nature of Plaintiffs’ claims.  See Fed. R. 
Evid. 201(b); Ritchie, 342 F.3d at 908.  Therefore, Exhibit 1 to the Chestnut Decl. is 
the proper subject of judicial notice. 
Exhibits 2 and 3 to the Chestnut Decl. 
Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of excerpts of the agreement between 
BANA and the California Employment Development Department (the “EDD 
Agreement”).  Exhibit 3 is a true and correct copy of excerpts of the August 24, 2020 
letter agreement between BANA and the California Employment Development 
Department (the “Letter Agreement”), which temporarily modifies the EDD 
Agreement.  The EDD Agreement is referenced in the MCC, and the MCC asserts 
two separate claims based on the issuance of debit cards pursuant to the EDD 
Agreement.  MCC ¶¶ 42, 44-46, 48-50, 54, 88, 98, 640, 647-49; Ritchie, 342 F.3d at 
908; Khoja, 899 F.3d at 1002.  The EDD Agreement forms the basis of Counts XI 
and XII, for breach of contract and breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair 
dealing.  See id. ¶¶ 640 (“As EDD benefits recipients and EDD Debit Cardholders, 
Plaintiffs and Class Members are intended third-party beneficiaries of the [EDD 
Agreement]”); 647-49. 
Good cause exists to take judicial notice of EDD Agreement because it forms 
the basis for two of Plaintiffs’ claims and is, thus, incorporated by reference.  Compl. 
¶ 640, 647-49; Ritchie, 342 F.3d at 908; Khoja, 899 F.3d at 1002.  Good cause also 
exists to take judicial notice of EDD Agreement because the MCC makes references 
to the EDD Agreement.  Additionally, good cause exists to take judicial notice of the 
EDD Agreement because Plaintiffs cannot credibly dispute the authenticity of this 
document.  See Fed. R. Evid. 201(b); Ritchie, 342 F.3d at 908.  Because the Letter 
Agreement temporarily modifies the EDD Agreement and is therefore a necessary 
part of the EDD Agreement, good cause exists to take judicial notice of the Letter 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 84-2     Filed 10/01/21     PageID.608     Page 6
of 9

MPA ISO REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 
ISO MOTION TO DISMISS 
6 
CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
Agreement for the reasons stated above.  Therefore, Exhibits 2 and 3 to the Chestnut 
Declaration are the proper subjects of judicial notice. 
For the reasons stated above, Defendant respectfully requests that the Court 
grant this Request for Judicial Notice. 
Dated:   October 1, 2021
Respectfully submitted, 
By: 
LAURA A. STOLL (SBN 255023)
LStoll@goodwinlaw.com 
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP 
601 South Figueroa Street, 41st Floor 
Los Angeles, California  90017 
Tel.: +1 213 426 2500 
Fax: +1 213 623 1673 
JAMES W. MCGARRY (pro hac vice) 
JMcGarry@goodwinlaw.com 
YVONNE W. CHAN (pro hac vice) 
YChan@goodwinlaw.com 
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP 
100 Northern Avenue 
Boston, MA  02210 
Tel.: +1 617 570 1000 
Fax: +1 617 523 1231 
THOMAS M. HEFFERON (pro hac vice) 
THefferon@goodwinlaw.com 
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP 
1900 N St. NW  
Washington, DC 20036  
Tel: +1 202 346 4000  
Fax: +1 202 346 4444 
JANICE P. BROWN (SBN 114433) 
jbrown@myersnave.com 
ARLENE R. YANG (SBN 297450) 
ayang@myersnave.com 
MEYERS NAVE 
600 B Street, Suite 1650 
San Diego, CA 92101 
BARRY W. LEE (SBN 088685) 
bwlee@manatt.com  
MANATT PHELPS & PHILLIPS LLP 
One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor  
San Francisco, CA 94111  
Tel.: +1 415 291 7450  
Fax: +1 415 291 7474 
s/ Yvonne W. Chan
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 84-2     Filed 10/01/21     PageID.609     Page 7
of 9

MPA ISO REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 
ISO MOTION TO DISMISS 
7 
CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
Attorneys for Defendant 
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. 
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 84-2     Filed 10/01/21     PageID.610     Page 8
of 9

MPA ISO REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 
ISO MOTION TO DISMISS 
8 
CASE NO. 21-MD-02992-LAB-MSB 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
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 
26 
27 
28 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 
I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the clerk of the 
court for the United States District Court for the Southern District of California by 
using the CM/ECF system on October 1, 2021.  I further certify that all participants 
in the case are registered CM/ECF users and that service will be accomplished by the 
CM/ECF system. I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and 
correct. 
Executed: 
October 1, 2021 
s/  Yvonne W. Chan 
Yvonne W. Chan
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB     Document 84-2     Filed 10/01/21     PageID.611     Page 9
of 9

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.84.2.pdf

Size

628,038 bytes

SHA-256

c1f9b155829d7b4dfecea30ca2a2212f51a457a9ffd18a2b116851d23cfe9c57

Our copy

gov.uscourts.casd.709615.84.2.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)