#Medquist transcriptions pro#

26 9 27 10 28 Case No.: CV 12-01324 PSG ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTSвЂ™ MOTION TO DECLARE PLAINTIFF A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT 3 See id.at *8. Reddy appealed the Ninth Circuit affirmed. The 15 16 17 court later dismissed the complaint in its entirety against all remaining defendants because of ReddyвЂ™s failure to timely serve. That court then 14 dismissed all claims asserted against Philips and Rusckowski for lack of personal jurisdiction. 9 With respect to Defendants Philips and Rusckowski, the court found that venue 13 was improper and transferred the case to the Central District of California. 8 11 The court granted MedQuistвЂ™s motion to dismiss based on res judicata because of ReddyвЂ™s prior 12 New Jersey case. ReddyвЂ™s complaint asserted the exact same set of claims based on the same facts. On June 19, 2009, Reddy sued MedQuist and others again, this time in the Southern District United States District Court For the Northern District of California 9 10 of California. 6 The court then dismissed the suit against the remaining defendants for ReddyвЂ™s failure to timely serve process. 5 The court later granted MedQuistвЂ™s motion for summary judgment on the remaining 6 7 8 breach of contract claim. 4 The court 4 granted various defendantsвЂ™ motion to dismiss all claims except ReddyвЂ™s claim for breach of 5 contract. 3 2 Reddy brought claims of RICO, fraud, civil conspiracy, interference with employment contract, 3 breach of contract, and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

Case No.: CV 12-01324 PSG ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTSвЂ™ MOTION TO DECLARE PLAINTIFF A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT 2 1 provided here namely that MedQuist used unfair billing practices to deprive her of fair pay. 2 Her complaint alleged nearly the same factual history as 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Unless otherwise noted, the factual background is taken as alleged by ReddyвЂ™s complaint. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 21 22 In September 2006, Reddy sued MedQuist and a number of other defendants for the first time in the District of New Jersey. Reddy was fired in September 2003 and marked ineligible for rehire at any MedQuist 19 office. Reddy complained to management 17 about what she viewed as unfair billing practices and applied for a transfer out of the Monrovia 18 branch. Also, in 15 16 her view, she was paid a lower rate than other transcriptionists.

She also 13 argues that MedQuist unfairly used a different rate to pay medical transcriptionists, which resulted 14 in a calculation of fewer lines per assignment as compared to the rate used to bill clients. First, Reddy alleges MedQuist reduced the pay 12 per line for medical transcriptionists to achieve a higher profit ratio for the company. Reddy alleges her pay fell 11 below what she was entitled to for several reasons. After MedQuist acquired both medical transcription companies, MedQuist asked Reddy to United States District Court For the Northern District of California 9 10 choose to work at one branch only and she chose to work in Monrovia. In 2000, Philips 7 8 purchased MedQuist and took over the day-to-day operations. MedQuist later acquired both MRC Group and YOG. Shortly 5 6 thereafter, she took on another medical transcriptionist job at Your Office Genie (вЂњYOGвЂќ) in Monrovia, California. In 1996, Reddy began working at a second medical 4 transcription company (which later became MRC Group) to supplement her income. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 1 1 2 In September 1992, Reddy began working as a medical transcriptionist for Transcriptions, 3 Limited, Inc., which later became MedQuist. 28 Case No.: CV 12-01324 PSG ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTSвЂ™ MOTION TO DECLARE PLAINTIFF A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT 1 II. Having reviewed the papers and 27 considered the arguments of counsel, DefendantsвЂ™ motion is GRANTED. The matter was submitted to the court 26 without oral argument pursuant to Civil Local Rule 7-1(b). Elson (collectively, вЂњS&CвЂќ) joined the motion. The next day, on July 27, 2012, 22 23 24 Defendants Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV, Philips Electronics North America Corporation (collectively, вЂњPhilipsвЂќ), as well as Defendants Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, Michael H. Smerek (collectively, W&SвЂќ) joined the motion on July 26, 2012.

#Medquist transcriptions pro#

Rusckowski filed a motion to declare 19 Krishna Reddy (вЂњReddyвЂќ) a vexatious litigant and to bar her from filing pro se complaints without 20 21 prior court consent. (collectively, вЂњMedQuistвЂќ), and Stephen H. INTRODUCTION On July 23, 2012, Defendants CBay Systems Holdings, Ltd, MedQuist Transcriptions, Ltd, 18 MedQuist, Inc. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: CV 12-01324 PSG ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTSвЂ™ MOTION TO DECLARE PLAINTIFF A VEXATIOUS LITIGANT (Re: Docket Nos. 121 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA United States District Court For the Northern District of California 9 SAN JOSE DIVISION 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 KRISHNA REDDY, Plaintiff, v.