N I T E D
T A T E S
I S T R I C T
O U R T
F o r t h e N o r t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f C a l i f o r n i a
Yoshimoto objects to the admission of the letter under Rule 408 (compromise and offers tocompromise) and Rule 802 (hearsay) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. Opposition, ECF No. 29 at10. The court rejects these objections as per the considerations discussed above in n.3.
C 10-05438 LBORDER DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
at 3.On or around November 13, 2009, Yoshimoto filed a supplemental administrative complaintagainst Defendants with the DFEH and EEOC, alleging further discrimination, retaliation andharassment.
On or around November 18, 2009, the DFEH issued Yoshimoto anotherRight-to-Sue Notice which again stated , “[t]his Right-to-Sue Notice allows you to file aprivate lawsuit in State court.”
As of November 17, 2009, Plaintiff had made claims fordiscrimination, retaliation and harassment against Defendants.
As of this date, Yoshimoto hadretained bankruptcy counsel to assist in filing for voluntary Chapter 7 bankruptcy.
The next day, on November 18, 2009, Yoshimoto filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy by filing hisvoluntary petition.
Yoshimoto did not disclose his legal claims against Defendants in either thebankruptcy schedules, which directed Yoshimoto list all of his claims and other personal property,or the statement of financial affairs, which directed Yoshimoto to list all suits and administrativeproceedings to which he had been a party in the preceding year.
at 4-5.On or around December 16, 2009, the bankruptcy trustee in Plaintiffs Chapter 7 proceedingsfiled a “Report of No Distribution,” certifying that, based on “[k]ey information about this case asreported in schedules filed by the debtor,” that “there is no property available for distribution fromthe estate over and above that exempted by law.”
at 6-7.On or around December 29, 2009, Yoshimoto filed two amended administrative complaintsagainst Defendants with the DFEH and EEOC, alleging discrimination, retaliation, and harassment.
at 5. On or around December 30, 2009, the DFEH issued Yoshimoto two additional Right-to-Sue Notices which stated, “[t]his Right-to-Sue Notice allows you to file a private lawsuit in Statecourt.”
at 6.On January 4, 2010, Yoshimoto’s counsel Mr. Prentice sent Defendants correspondencenoting his retention by Yoshimoto, including the amended administrative complaints, and invitingDefendants’ “attorney to contact [him] to discuss [his] clients [sic] pending claims.”
Case4:10-cv-05438-LB Document39 Filed06/06/11 Page3 of 16