Radcliff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 DAVID RADCLIFF, individually and on Case No.: 20-cv-1555-H-MSB behalf of others similarly situated and 11 aggrieved, ORDER PENDING MANDATE HEARING Plaintiff,

13 v.

SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC

COMPANY, a California corporation; SEMPRA ENERGY, a California 16 corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants. 19 On November 20, 2023, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed this Court’s decision to dismiss Plaintiff David Radcliff’s (“Plaintiff”) representative1 claim for penalties under the California Private Attorneys General Act 23

25 1 For the purposes of this order, the Court uses the term “individual” PAGA claims to 26 mean claims that are premised on California Labor Code violations “actually sustained by the plaintiff” and “representative” PAGA claims to mean those claims “arising out of events involving other employees.” See Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S.Ct. 28 ||…