Case 2:16-cv JCC Document 9 Filed 02/29/16 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

Transcription

1 Case :-cv-00-jcc Document Filed 0// Page of Honorable John C. Coughenour 0 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE YASIN HUFUNE, an individual, and SAMATAR ABDI, an individual, vs. Plaintiffs, BAGS, INC., a foreign company, Defendant. I. ANSWER Case No. :-cv-00-jcc DEFENDANT S ANSWER, DEFENSES AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO FIRST AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT Defendant Bags, Inc. hereby provides its answer and asserts its defenses and affirmative defenses to the First Amended Class Action Complaint of Plaintiffs Yasin Hufune and Samatar Abdi (collectively Plaintiffs ) as follows:. Defendant admits that Plaintiffs have filed a lawsuit on behalf of themselves and others alleging violation of the SeaTac Ordinance and unjust enrichment as alleged in Paragraph of the First Amended Class Action Complaint, but lacks knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief to admit or deny the remaining allegations contained in that paragraph and therefore denies the same. Defendant affirmatively alleges that it is not liable for the alleged conduct.. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraphs and of the First Amended Class Action Complaint. COMPLAINT - S.E. th Street, Suite Tel: () - Fax:() -00

2 Case :-cv-00-jcc Document Filed 0// Page of 0. Defendant lacks knowledge and information to form sufficient belief as to the allegations contained in the first sentence of Paragraph of the First Amended Class Action Complaint and therefore denies the same. Defendant denies the remaining allegations contained in that paragraph.. Defendant lacks knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations in the first sentence of Paragraph of the First Amended Class Action Complaint and therefore denies the same. Defendant denies the remaining allegations contained in that paragraph.. Defendant admits the allegations contained in the first sentence of Paragraph of the First Amended Class Action Complaint. Defendant denies the remaining allegations in that paragraph.. Defendant admits the allegations contained in Paragraph of the First Amended Class Action Complaint.. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph of the First Amended Class Action Complaint, except that it lacks knowledge and information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegation related to specific members of the putative Class.. Defendant admits the allegations contained in the first and second sentences of Paragraph of the First Amended Class Action Complaint. Defendant denies the remaining allegations contained in that paragraph.. Defendant admits the allegations contained in Paragraphs 0 through of the First Amended Class Action Complaint, except that SeaTac s Ordinance set the wage rate at $. per hour. Defendant affirmatively alleges that the Ordinance did not apply in whole or part to its operations at SeaTac and that said Ordinance may be unenforceable under federal law. 0. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraphs,, and of the First Amended Class Action Complaint. COMPLAINT - S.E. th Street, Suite Tel: () - Fax:() -00

3 Case :-cv-00-jcc Document Filed 0// Page of 0. Defendant admits the allegations contained in Paragraphs and of the First Amended Class Action Complaint, but denies that Plaintiffs have viable claims or that a class action would be an appropriate vehicle in this case.. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraphs through of the First Amended Class Action Complaint.. Defendant admits the allegations contained in Paragraphs through of the First Amended Class Action Complaint. Defendant affirmatively alleges those statutory provisions are inapplicable to Plaintiffs claims herein.. Defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraphs through of the First Amended Class Action Complaint.. Defendant denies that Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief sought in Paragraphs A through G of the Prayer for Relief in the First Amended Class Action Complaint. Defendant also denies that Plaintiffs or any members of their putative class were damaged by Defendant or are entitled to any form of damages or other relief. Defendant further denies that the present action is appropriately pursued as, or meets the requirements for proceeding as, a class action. II. DEFENSES AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES Having fully answered Plaintiffs First Amended Class Action Complaint, Defendant pleads the following defenses and affirmative defenses, without waiving any arguments that they may be entitled to assert concerning the burden of proof, legal presumptions, or other legal characterizations. Defendant expressly disclaims any burden of proof or burden of going forward not otherwise imposed upon it by law.. Plaintiffs First Amended Class Action Complaint fails to state a claim against Defendant upon which relief may be granted.. Plaintiffs claims are preempted under federal labor law and/or the Airline Deregulation Act, and/or the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. COMPLAINT - S.E. th Street, Suite Tel: () - Fax:() -00

4 Case :-cv-00-jcc Document Filed 0// Page of 0. Some or all of Plaintiffs claims against Defendant for themselves or for members of their proposed class are barred due to bona fide dispute(s) concerning the obligation of payment under the at-issue Ordinance.. Plaintiffs and/or any putative class members are not entitled to double damages because Defendants did not willfully withhold or fail to pay wages or acted in good faith and upon a reasonable belief that its actions did not violate applicable laws alleged in the First Amended Class Action Complaint.. Defendant is not liable for double or exemplary damages because Plaintiffs and/or any putative class members knowingly submitted to the withholding of wages.. Some or all of Plaintiffs claims against Defendant for themselves or for members of the putative class are barred because one or more of the Plaintiffs, or some or all of the putative class members, knowingly submitted to some or all of the conduct by Defendant that Plaintiffs challenge in the First Amended Class Action Complaint.. If either of the Plaintiffs or any of the putative class members have sustained any damages from conduct by Defendant, which Defendant disputes, then some or all of these alleged damages may have been proximately caused by other individuals or entities for whom Defendant is not legally responsible.. The First Amended Class Action Complaint and its putative causes of action are barred, in whole or in part, because Plaintiffs and/or any putative class members failed to use reasonable diligence or due care to avoid the alleged harm.. The First Amended Class Action Complaint, and each and every claim for relief contained therein, is barred, in whole or in part, to the extent that damages, if any, resulted from the acts and/or omissions of Plaintiffs. 0. Some or all of the disputed time for which Plaintiffs and/or members of the putative class seek recovery of wages purportedly owed is not compensable pursuant to the de minimis doctrine. COMPLAINT - S.E. th Street, Suite Tel: () - Fax:() -00

5 Case :-cv-00-jcc Document Filed 0// Page of 0. Plaintiffs and/or the putative class members are precluded from recovering any amounts from Defendant because it has paid all sums legally due under federal and Washington law.. Some or all of the disputed time for which Plaintiffs and/or members of the putative class seek recovery of wages purportedly owed is not compensable pursuant to a Defendant s collective bargaining agreement with Service Employees International Union.. This action is not properly maintainable as a class action, because Plaintiffs cannot establish all the elements necessary for class certification in that, among other things: common issues of fact or law do not predominate, to the contrary, individual issues predominate; Plaintiffs claims are not representative or typical of the claims of the putative class; Plaintiffs are not proper class representatives; Plaintiffs and alleged putative class counsel are not adequate representatives for the alleged putative class; there does not exist a well-defined community of interest as to the questions of law and fact involved; the putative class is sufficiently manageable without implementing the class action mechanism and, therefore, it is not the superior method for adjudicating this dispute; and, the alleged putative class is not ascertainable, nor are its members identifiable.. The First Amended Class Action Complaint, and each and every cause of action alleged therein, is barred, in whole or in part, to the extent that Plaintiffs cannot establish all the elements necessary for class certification, they do not have standing with respect to the claims and are not competent to represent the interests of others.. As former employees, Plaintiffs have no standing on which to assert claims for injunctive relief.. This action is not properly maintainable as a class action, because Plaintiffs claims are unique to Plaintiffs so they are incapable of adequately representing the putative class.. Class or subclass certification would be inappropriate due to conflicts of interest between Plaintiffs and putative class or subclass members, or between and among putative class or subclass members. COMPLAINT - S.E. th Street, Suite Tel: () - Fax:() -00

6 Case :-cv-00-jcc Document Filed 0// Page of 0. Defendant reserves the right to assert by supplemental pleading any defenses, affirmative defense, counterclaim or cross-claim which matures or is acquired by one or more of them subsequent to this Answer. DEFENDANT S PRAYER FOR RELIEF THEREFORE, having fully answered the First Amended Class Action Complaint, Defendant prays for judgment against the Plaintiffs as follows:. That Plaintiffs claims be dismissed with prejudice;. That Plaintiffs class allegations be stricken from the Complaint;. That Defendant be awarded its reasonable costs and disbursements herein, including attorneys fees pursuant to Chapter. RCW or as otherwise allowed by law; and and proper.. That Defendant be awarded such other and further relief as the Court deems just DATED this th day of February,. Jeffrey A. James, WSBA # jaj@sebrisbusto.com Darren A. Feider, WSBA #0 dfeider@sebrisbusto.com SE th Street, Suite Bellevue, WA 00 Telephone: () - Attorneys for Defendant COMPLAINT - S.E. th Street, Suite Tel: () - Fax:() -00

7 Case :-cv-00-jcc Document Filed 0// Page of 0 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Holly Holman, certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that, on February,, I caused to be served the attached document to the individual listed below in the manner shown next to his name: Attorneys for Plaintiff: Duncan Turner, WSBA # Badgley Mullins Turner PLLC Ballinger Way NE, Suite 0 Seattle, WA duncanturner@badgleymullins.com Cleveland Stockmeyer, WSBA # Cleveland Stockmeyer PLLC 0 Sunnyside Ave. N. Seattle, WA 0 cleve@clevelandstockmeyer.com Daniel R. Whitmore, #0 Law Office of Daniel R. Whitmore th Avenue West, Suite 0 Seattle, WA dan@whitmorelawfirm.com /s/ Holly Holman Holly Holman Via U.S. Mail By Fed Express Via Facsimile By Hand Delivery Via ABC Messenger Via Electronic Mail Via E-service COMPLAINT - S.E. th Street, Suite Tel: () - Fax:() -00