Carlos Diaz v. Chevron Corporation, et al.

Diaz · United States District Court for the Northern District of California · December 15, 2025 · No. 25-cv-03327-EMC

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California resolves cross-motions for partial summary judgment concerning Carlos Diaz’s California Private Attorneys General Act claim against Contra Costa Electric. The court holds that CCE waived its ability to invoke California Labor Code section 2699.6 and to compel arbitration after litigating the matter for approximately five years without pursuing those defenses. The court further holds that the PAGA notice broadly covers uncompensated employer-mandated travel time, but does not cover alleged uncompensated donning and doffing of protective equipment.

Holdings

  1. CCE waived its right to rely on section 2699.6 by litigating the merits for years in state court without timely asserting and pursuing the statute as a bar to the PAGA claim.
  2. CCE waived its right to seek arbitration by litigating the case in state court for approximately five years without pursuing its arbitration defense.
  3. The PAGA notice was not limited to employees who were required to report to particular parking lots at specified times; it sufficiently encompassed the broader alleged failure to compensate employees for employer-mandated travel time, including travel from refinery entrances to worksites.
  4. The PAGA notice did not sufficiently encompass a claim for uncompensated time spent donning or doffing protective gear or equipment.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether CCE waived its right to invoke California Labor Code section 2699.6 after litigating the case for approximately five years without pursuing that defense.
  2. Whether CCE waived its right to compel arbitration under the applicable collective bargaining agreements by litigating the case extensively without seeking arbitration.
  3. Whether the PAGA notice limited the representative claim to employees required to report to specified parking lots at specified times, or instead encompassed uncompensated employer-mandated travel time more broadly.
  4. Whether the PAGA notice also encompassed claims for uncompensated time spent donning and doffing protective gear or equipment.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (18)

  • Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248-49, 252, 255 (1986)(followed)
  • Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986)(followed)
  • Cabo Distrib. Co. v. Brady, 821 F. Supp. 601, 607 (N.D. Cal. 1992)(followed)
  • Fontenot v. Upjohn Co., 780 F.2d 1190, 1194 (5th Cir. 1986)(followed)
  • Oswald v. Murray Plumbing & Heating Corp., 82 Cal. App. 5th 938, 941 (2022)(followed)
  • Redwood Theatres, Inc. v. Festival Enters., Inc., 908 F.2d 477, 483 n.6 (9th Cir. 1990)(distinguished)
  • AP-Colton LLC v. Ohaeri, 240 Cal. App. 4th 500, 507 (2015)(distinguished)
  • Dones v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 55 Cal. App. 5th 665, 677-78 (2020)(followed)
  • Hill v. Xerox Bus. Servs., LLC, 59 F.4th 457, 460 (9th Cir. 2023)(followed)
  • Rojas-Cifuentes v. Superior Court, 58 Cal. App. 5th 1051, 1059 (2020)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 18.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…