Court filing
Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Master… — Bofa Ca Unemployment (Dkt. 90.1)
Summary
Plaintiffs' Request for Judicial Notice in support of their opposition to the motion to dismiss the Master Consolidated Complaint, Document 90-1, filed 11/15/21 in In re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation, Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LAB-MSB (S.D. Cal.), before Hon. Larry Alan Burns. They ask the Court to consider two documents as incorporated by reference: the California EDD Debit Card Account Agreement effective in 2018 and excerpts of the 2015 agreement between Bank of America and EDD. They say Bank of America's versions raise authenticity issues, because its cardholder agreement says North Carolina law applies while the website version says California law, and its contract version has redline edits. The hearing date is January 10, 2022.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Master… — Bofa Ca Unemployment (Dkt. 90.1).”
Original at ecf.casd.uscourts.gov, No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB, Doc. 90-1. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/court-filings/full-docket-bofa-ca-unemployment-casd-709615/2021-11-15-gov-uscourts-casd-709615-90-1-gov-uscourts-casd-709615-90-1/
, SHA-256 6ceecdcf3fc787796848855b4b97c2611a12371d8e98605bc1fbba9fdce190b1.Full text
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 90-1 Filed 11/15/21 PageID.717 Page 1
of 5
1 JOSEPH W. COTCHETT (SBN 36324) MICHAEL RUBIN (SBN 80618)
2 jcotchett@cpmlegal.com mrubin@altber.com
BRIAN DANITZ (SBN 247403) STACEY M. LEYTON (SBN 203827)
3 bdanitz@cpmlegal.com sleyton@altber.com
4 KARIN B. SWOPE (Pro Hac Vice) MATTHEW MURRAY (SBN 271461)
kswope@cpmlegal.com mmurray@altber.com
5 ANDREW F. KIRTLEY (SBN 328023) CONNIE K. CHAN (SBN 284230)
6 akirtley@cpmlegal.com cchan@altber.com
KAIYI A. XIE (SBN 311182) CHRISTINE SALAZAR (SBN 330468)
7 kxie@cpmlegal.com csalazar@altber.com
8 COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP ALTSHULER BERZON LLP
840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200 177 Post Street, Suite 300
9 Burlingame, CA 94010 San Francisco, CA 94108
10 Telephone: (650) 697-6000 Telephone: (415) 421-7151
Fax: (650) 697-0577 Fax: (415) 362-8064
11
12 Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Class
(Additional Counsel Listed Below)
13
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
15
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
16
17 IN RE BANK OF AMERICA Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LAB-MSB
18 CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT
BENEFITS LITIGATION PLAINTIFFS’ REQUEST FOR
19 JUDICIAL NOTICE IN
20 SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO
MOTION TO DISMISS MASTER
21 CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT
22
This Document Relates to All Actions Date: January 10, 2022
23 Time: 11:30 a.m.
24 Crtm: 14A – 14th Floor
Judge: Hon. Larry Alan Burns
25
26
27
28
Plaintiffs’ Request for Judicial Notice ISO Opposition to Motion to Dismiss;
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LAB-MSB
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 90-1 Filed 11/15/21 PageID.718 Page 2
of 5
1 Plaintiffs request that the Court take judicial notice of and consider the
2 following documents as incorporated by reference into Plaintiffs’ Master
3 Consolidated Complaint (“MCC”) in connection with Plaintiffs’ Opposition to
4 Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss.
5 1. The California Employment Development Department Debit Card
6 Account Agreement (“Cardholder Agreement”), effective March 1,
7 2018, available on Bank of America’s EDD Debit Card website at:
8 https://www.visaprepaidprocessing.com/eddcard/Program/Terms,
9 and attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of Brian Danitz In
10 Support of Plaintiffs’ (1) Request for Judicial Notice; (2) Plaintiffs’
11 Opposition to Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice (“Danitz
12 Decl.”). See Danitz Decl. ¶ 2 and Ex. A. The Cardholder Agreement
13 is referenced in the MCC at the following paragraphs: ¶¶ 4, 5, 70,
14 71, 72, 73, 94, 99, 121, 126, 154, 209, 313, 433, 441, 452, 475, 497,
15 531(b)(xii), 604, 605, 606, 607, 606, 607, 608, 620, 621, 646.
16 2. Excerpts of the agreement between Bank of America, N.A.
17 (“BofA”) and the California Employment Development Department
18 (“EDD”), Agreement No. M6100352, executed October 13, 2015
19 (“EDD-BofA Contract”), produced by EDD in response to
20 Plaintiffs’ Public Records Act Request and attached as Exhibit B to
21 the Danitz Declaration. See Danitz Decl. ¶ 3 and Ex. B. The Edd-
22 BofA Contract is referenced in the MCC at the following
23 paragraphs: ¶¶ 2, 35, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 48, 49, 50, 53, 54,
24 88, 98, 209, 289, 389, 531(b)(xii-iii), 595, 599, 627, 638, 639, 640,
25 641, 642, 643, 647, 659.
26 Under, the incorporation by reference doctrine, a court may consider an
27 extrinsic document “the complaint ‘necessarily relies’ on if (1) the complaint refers
28 to the document; (2) the document is central to the plaintiff’s claim; and (3) no
Plaintiffs’ Request for Judicial Notice ISO Opposition to Motion to Dismiss;
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LAB-MSB 1
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 90-1 Filed 11/15/21 PageID.719 Page 3
of 5
1 party questions the authenticity of the copy attached to the 12(b)(6) motion.”
2 Marder v. Lopez, 450 F.3d 445, 448 (9th Cir. 2006) (citations omitted). As set
3 forth above, and in the accompanying declaration, the MCC refers extensively to,
4 and relies upon, the Cardholder Agreement and the 2015 EDD-BofA Agreement.
5 A court may take judicial notice of an “adjudicative fact . . . not subject to
6 reasonable dispute.” Fed. R. Evid. 201. A fact is “not subject to reasonable dispute”
7 if it is “generally known” or “can be accurately and readily determined from
8 sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” Fed. R. Evid. 201.
9 Defendants submitted versions of these documents as exhibits 1 and 2 to the
10 Chestnut Declaration. However, as set forth more fully in Plaintiffs’ Opposition to
11 Defendants’ Request for Judicial Notice, those versions of the Cardholder
12 Agreement and the EDD-BofA Contract raise disputed factual issues concerning
13 authenticity. In particular, the version of the Cardholder Agreement relied upon by
14 Plaintiffs appears on BofA’s public EDD Debit Card website and provides that
15 California law governs the Cardholder Agreement; whereas the version submitted
16 by BofA does not appear on its website and it provides that North Carolina law
17 applies. The two versions are otherwise substantially the same. See Danitz Decl.
18 ¶ 2 and Ex. A.
19 With respect to the EDD-BofA Contract, Defendant’s Exhibit 2 includes
20 redline edits, indicating it is not the final version of the document. Specifically, the
21 cover page to EDD’s Request for Proposal includes a redline striking out “April
22 21, 2015” and adding in (in redline) “August 14, 2015.” (Chestnut Decl., Ex. 2 at
23 8). The equivalent page of Plaintiffs’ Exhibit B is simply dated August 14, 2015
24 without any redlining, indicating that it is the final version of the document.
25 Accordingly, Plaintiffs submit Exhibit B which contains equivalent excerpts of the
26 pages of the version submitted by BofA, with one additional page, which document
27 was produced by California EDD in response to Plaintiffs’ Public Records Act
28 request. See Danitz Decl. ¶ 3 and Ex. B.
Plaintiffs’ Request for Judicial Notice ISO Opposition to Motion to Dismiss;
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LAB-MSB 2
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 90-1 Filed 11/15/21 PageID.720 Page 4
of 5
1 For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court grant
2 this Request for Judicial Notice.
3 Dated: November 15, 2021 COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP
4 By: /s/ Brian Danitz
5 JOSEPH W. COTCHETT
BRIAN DANITZ
6 KARIN B. SWOPE
ANDREW F. KIRTLEY
7 KAIYI A. XIE
8 Dated: November 15, 2021 ALTSHULER BERZON LLP
9
By: /s/ Michael Rubin
10
MICHAEL RUBIN
11 STACEY M. LEYTON
MATTHEW MURRAY
12 CONNIE K. CHAN
CHRISTINE M. SALAZAR
13
Co-Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs and the
14 Proposed Class
15
DAVID S. CASEY, JR. (SBN 060768) JOSHUA B. SWIGART (SBN 225557)
16 dcasey@cglaw.com josh@swigartlawgroup.com
17 GAYLE M. BLATT (SBN 122048) JULIANA G. BLAHA (SBN 331066)
gmb@cglaw.com juliana@swigartlawgroup.com
18 JEREMY ROBINSON (SBN 188325) SWIGART LAW GROUP, APC
19 jrobinson@cglaw.com 2221 Camino Del Rio South
P. CAMILLE GUERRA (SBN 326546) Suite 308
20 camille@cglaw.com San Diego, CA 92108
21 CATHERINE McBAIN (SBN 303911) (866) 219-3343
kmcbain@cglaw.com Fax: (866) 219-8344
22 CASEY GERRY SCHENK
23 FRANCAVILLA BLATT & DANIEL G. SHAY (SBN 250548)
PENFIELD, LLP danielshay@tcpafdcpa.com
24 110 Laurel Street LAW OFFICE OF DANIEL G. SHAY
25 San Diego, CA 92101 2221 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 308
Telephone: (619) 238-1811 San Diego, CA 92108
26 Fax: (619) 544-9232 Telephone: (619) 222-7429
27 Fax: (866) 431-3292
28 Liaison Counsel for Class Plaintiffs Liaison Counsel for Individual Plaintiffs
Plaintiffs’ Request for Judicial Notice ISO Opposition to Motion to Dismiss;
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LAB-MSB 3
Case 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB Document 90-1 Filed 11/15/21 PageID.721 Page 5
of 5
1
2
3
SIGNATURE ATTESTATION
4
Pursuant to Section 2(f)(4) of the Electronic Case Filing Administrative
5
Policies and Procedures Manual, I, Brian Danitz, hereby certify that the content of
6
this document is acceptable to all the signatories herein and that I have obtained
7
counsel’s authorization to affix their electronic signatures to this document.
8
9 /s/ Brian Danitz
10 BRIAN DANITZ
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Plaintiffs’ Request for Judicial Notice ISO Opposition to Motion to Dismiss;
Case No. 3:21-md-02992-LAB-MSB 4
File and source
- File
- gov.uscourts.casd.709615.90.1.pdf
- Size
- 201,694 bytes
- SHA-256
- 6ceecdcf3fc787796848855b4b97c2611a12371d8e98605bc1fbba9fdce190b1
- Original
- PACER (login required)