This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 11/23/2020 at 05:35:16 (UTC).

CONSUMER ADVOCACY GROUP INC VS NEXT GENERATION PRODUCTS INC

Case Summary

On 03/22/2018 CONSUMER ADVOCACY GROUP INC filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against NEXT GENERATION PRODUCTS INC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is JOHN P. DOYLE. The case status is Disposed - Judgment Entered.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****9060

  • Filing Date:

    03/22/2018

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

JOHN P. DOYLE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

CONSUMER ADVOCACY GROUP INC.

Defendants, Respondents and Cross Defendants

ROXY TRADING INC.

EL MONTE SUPERSTORE INC.

TRAN'S FAMILY INC.

DOES 1 TO 20

NEXT GENERATION PRODUCTS INC.

SF SUPERMARKET INC.

EL MONTE SUPERSTORE

SHUN FAT SUPERMARKET INC.

K&M TRADING INC ROE 1

H.C. FOODS CO. LTD

K&M TRADING CO.

K&M TRADING INC.

LEE MING DBA K&M TRADING CO.

NEXT GENERATION PRODUCTS . INC . DBA NDR TRADING

NEXT GENERATION PRODUCTS INC. DBA NDR TRADING

Defendant, Respondent and Cross Plaintiff

EL MONTE SUPERSTORE INC.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

YEROUSHALMI REUBEN ESQ.

YEROUSHALMI REUBEN

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

FINE ARTHUR ESQ.

DOWNING KIRK GORDON

FINE ARTHUR BARRY

Defendant and Cross Plaintiff Attorney

DOWNING KIRK GORDON

Cross Defendant Attorneys

NAMUO CLYNTON

FU JENNIFER

 

Court Documents

Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT OR ORDER

11/3/2020: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT OR ORDER

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (HEARING ON MOTION TO APPROVE AND ENTER CONSENT JUDGMENT BETWE...) OF 09/16/2020

9/16/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (HEARING ON MOTION TO APPROVE AND ENTER CONSENT JUDGMENT BETWE...) OF 09/16/2020

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

3/16/2020: Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

3/16/2020: Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (POST-MEDIATION STATUS CONFERENCE)

3/17/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (POST-MEDIATION STATUS CONFERENCE)

Request for Dismissal

12/6/2019: Request for Dismissal

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY (NOT "FURTH...)

6/25/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY (NOT "FURTH...)

Separate Statement

4/15/2019: Separate Statement

Memorandum of Points & Authorities

4/15/2019: Memorandum of Points & Authorities

Memorandum of Points & Authorities

4/15/2019: Memorandum of Points & Authorities

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

4/15/2019: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

5/29/2019: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

5/29/2019: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Reply - REPLY TO EL MONTE'S RESPONSE & OPPO TO CAG'S MOTION DEEMED ADMISSIONS

6/17/2019: Reply - REPLY TO EL MONTE'S RESPONSE & OPPO TO CAG'S MOTION DEEMED ADMISSIONS

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (STATUS CONFERENCE; CONFERENCE RE: MEDIATION SETTING; ORDER TO...)

3/26/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (STATUS CONFERENCE; CONFERENCE RE: MEDIATION SETTING; ORDER TO...)

NOTICE OF RULING RE: STATUS CONFERENCE

9/13/2018: NOTICE OF RULING RE: STATUS CONFERENCE

PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

5/21/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

SUMMONS -

3/22/2018: SUMMONS -

132 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 11/03/2020
  • DocketNotice (Notice of Entry of Judgment or Order); Filed by El Monte Superstore, Inc. (Cross-Complainant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/27/2020
  • Docketat 09:00 AM in Department 58; Order to Show Cause Re: (Entry of Default Judgment as to Cross-Defendant Next Generation Products) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/27/2020
  • DocketJudgment; Filed by El Monte Superstore, Inc. (Cross-Complainant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/27/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Entry of Default Judgment as to Cross...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/30/2020
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by El Monte Superstore, Inc. (Cross-Complainant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/30/2020
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by El Monte Superstore, Inc. (Cross-Complainant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2020
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by El Monte Superstore, Inc. (Cross-Complainant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/17/2020
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by El Monte Superstore, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 58; Status Conference ((All-Purpose)) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 58; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal ((as to Complaint)) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
194 More Docket Entries
  • 05/21/2018
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/18/2018
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/18/2018
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/26/2018
  • DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/26/2018
  • DocketOSC-Failure to File Proof of Serv; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/26/2018
  • DocketORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/26/2018
  • DocketNOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/22/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/22/2018
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/22/2018
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR PENALTY AND INJUNCTION

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC699060    Hearing Date: September 16, 2020    Dept: 58

Judge John P. Doyle

Department 58


Hearing Date: September 16, 2020

Case Name: Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. Next Generation Products, Inc., et al.

Case No.: BC699060

Matter: Motion for Entry of Consent Judgment

Moving Party: Plaintiff Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc.

Responding Party: Unopposed


Tentative Ruling: The Motion for Entry of Consent Judgment is granted.


This is an action brought pursuant to Proposition 65 pertaining to lead, lead compound, cadmium, and cadmium compound exposure. Plaintiff Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. seeks for the Court to enter a consent judgment between it and Defendants Shun Fat Supermarket, Inc.; El Monte , Superstore, Inc.; SF Supermarket, Inc.; and Tran’s Family, Inc. Plaintiff provides, “[t]he Consent Judgment resolves this action, brought pursuant to The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, California Health & Safety Code (“HSC”) Section 25249.5, et seq. (“Proposition 65”), regarding exposure to Lead and Lead Compounds (“Lead”), Cadmium and Cadmium Compounds (“Cadmium”), and Inorganic Arsenic Compounds and Inorganic Arsenic Oxides (“Arsenic”) in Dried Seaweed, Dried Shrimp, and Crab Paste (“Covered Products”), and satisfies the three (3) prerequisites for court approval under HSC Section 25249.7(f).”

Because Plaintiff will receive consideration in this settlement, court approval is required. (Health & Safety Code § 25249.7(f)(4).) The Court may approve the settlement “only if the court makes all of the following findings: (A) Any warning that is required by the settlement complies with this chapter. (B) Any award of attorney's fees is reasonable under California law. (C) Any penalty amount is reasonable based on the criteria set forth in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b).” (Idid.) Plaintiff has the burden of producing sufficient evidence to sustain each finding. (Health & Safety Code § 25249.7(f)(5).)

In assessing the amount of a civil penalty for a violation of this chapter, the court shall consider all of the following:

(A) The nature and extent of the violation.

(B) The number of, and severity of, the violations.

(C) The economic effect of the penalty on the violator.

(D) Whether the violator took good faith measures to comply with this chapter and the time these measures were taken.

(E) The willfulness of the violator’s misconduct.

(F) The deterrent effect that the imposition of the penalty would have on both the violator and the regulated community as a whole.

(G) Any other factor that justice may require.

(Health & Safety Code § 25249.7(b)(2).)

The injunctive relief is as follows:

(1) El Monte Defendants shall not sell in California, offer for sale in California, or ship for sale in California any Dried Seaweed unless the level of Lead does not exceed 75 parts per billion (“ppb”), the level of cadmium does not exceed 85 ppb, and the level of Arsenic does not exceed 15 ppb.

(2) El Monte Defendants shall not sell in California, offer for sale in California, or ship for sale in California any Dried Shrimp unless the level of Lead does not exceed 40 ppb, the level of Cadmium does not exceed 85 ppb, and the level of Arsenic does not exceed 15 ppb, and;

(3) El Monte Defendants shall not sell in California, offer for sale in California, or ship or sale in California any Crab Paste unless the level of Lead does not exceed 20 ppb.

(4) For any Dried Seaweed and Dried Shrimp that exceed the respective levels for Lead, Arsenic, and/or Cadmium, El Monte Defendants must provide a Proposition 65 compliant warning for the Covered Products. For any Crab Paste that exceed the respective level for Lead, El Monte Defendants must provide a Proposition 65 compliant warning for the Covered Products.

Further, Defendants will tender $11,430 as civil penalties, $8,570 as a settlement payment, and $150,000 for Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees.

After having reviewed all of the records in this action, the Court finds that the consent judgment ensures compliance with Proposition 65 and that the attorneys’ fee award, settlement payment, and civil penalty are reasonable and appropriate. The Motion is granted.

Case Number: BC699060    Hearing Date: June 24, 2020    Dept: 58

Judge John P. Doyle

Department 58


Hearing Date: June 24, 2020

Case Name: Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. v. Next Generation Products, Inc., et al.

Case No.: BC699060

Motion: Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

Moving Party: Cindy T. Nguyen, counsel for Defendant Next Generation Products, Inc.

Responding Party: Unopposed


Tentative Ruling: The Motion to be Relieved as Counsel is granted.


Cindy T. Nguyen’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Defendant Next Generation Products, Inc. is granted because it meets all requirements of Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362.