Pfeiffer

FACTS

Pfeiffer filed his complaint alleging breach of employment contract and related statutory claims on September 20, 2021. The complaint alleged that, although Berg resided outside the state of California, he had consented to jurisdiction by filing an application to appear pro hac vice in the California litigation that was the subject of Pfeiffer’s employment. In February 2022, Berg moved to quash service on the basis the court lacked jurisdiction over both the individual and the firm. In April 2022, the court granted the motion, concluding Pfeiffer failed to sustain his burden of establishing that Berg had purposely availed

Pfeiffer requests we take judicial notice of several documents that are records of a court in Texas. We deny the request because, as Pfeiffer acknowledges, these documents were not before the trial court. Berg also requests we take judicial notice of seven other documents purportedly filed in, or issued by, courts in Texas. These documents are unaccompanied by any evidence purporting to authenticate them. The record is also at best unclear whether they were before the trial court. The request is therefore denied.

2 themselves of the benefits and…