Sheppard

Sheppard v. Staffmark Investment, LLC

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaFebruary 23, 20215:20-cv-05443California5,641 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND1

10 Defendant Staffmark is a staffing agency, which places workers at temporary worksites around the United States, including California. Declaration of Suzanne Perry (“Perry Decl.”) ¶ 7, ECF 22-1. Staffmark made an offer of employment to Plaintiff Sheppard on or around February 7, 14 2019. Perry Decl. ¶ 10. The offer was contingent on Plaintiff’s completion of Staffmark’s 15 conditional job offer (“CJO”) packet, which included the arbitration agreement (“Arbitration 16 Agreement”). Perry Decl. ¶¶ 23-29. The Arbitration Agreement was presented to Plaintiff during 17 the electronic onboarding process. Declaration of Emily Giltner (“Giltner Decl.”) ¶¶ 29-32, ECF 18 22-2. Plaintiff was allowed to complete this process at her own pace. Perry Decl. ¶¶ 18-20; 20

1 Defendants Staffmark and UPSMI request judicial notice of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint. See ECF 23, 31. Plaintiff's verified complaint is already contained in the record as it is attached to Defendants’ Notice of Removal. See ECF 1-1. While there is little need to take judicial notice of the complaint as it has already been filed on this docket, Courts may take…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.