Case 2:16-cv RSL Document 74 Filed 06/27/17 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

Similar documents
Case 2:16-cv RSL Document 84 Filed 03/23/18 Page 1 of 7

Case 2:16-cv RSL Document 13 Filed 05/11/17 Page 1 of 10

Case 2:16-cv RSL Document 75 Filed 06/28/17 Page 1 of 17

Case 3:05-cv RBL Document 100 Filed 05/01/2007 Page 1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EL DORADO DIVISION. ROSALINO PEREZ-BENITES, et al. PLAINTIFFS

HISTORY OF THE ADOPTION AND AMENDMENT OF FLSA SECTION 16(B), RELATED PORTAL ACT PROVISIONS, AND FED. R. CIV. P. 23

Case 2:14-cv ER Document 89 Filed 02/22/18 Page 1 of 21 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 1:15-cv LMB-JFA Document 36 Filed 06/24/16 Page 1 of 7 PageID# 304

Case 2:16-cv RSL Document 82 Filed 12/20/18 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS CIVIL ACTION NO RWZ

Case 0:16-cv WPD Document 165 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/04/2018 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

STATE OF WASHINGTON KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT ) ) ) ) Plaintiff Mohamed A. Hussein ( Plaintiff ), by his attorneys and on behalf of all others

Case3:15-cv Document1 Filed01/09/15 Page1 of 16

USDS SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC#:

Case 2:14-cv RJS Document 17 Filed 06/04/14 Page 1 of 7

Case 2:16-cv RSL Document 34 Filed 01/18/17 Page 1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. herself and all others similarly situated, ) ) ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF S Plaintiff, ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION ORDER. Motion for Class Certification of State Law Claims

Case 5:14-cv EGS Document 75 Filed 02/05/16 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MONTANA BILLINGS DIVISION

Case: 1:13-cv DCN Doc #: 137 Filed: 03/02/16 1 of 13. PageID #: 12477

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. [Complaint Filed 11/24/2010] [Alameda County Case No.

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION AMENDED COMPLAINT

Attorneys for Plaintiffs MICHELLE RENEE MCGRATH and VERONICA O BOY, on behalf of themselves, and all others similarly situated

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/08/ :05 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/08/2016

Case 3:07-cv SI Document 109 Filed 07/08/2008 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 08/31/17 Page 1 of 14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. v. Civil Action No. 3:06-CV-010-N ORDER

1. OVERTIME COMPENSATION AND

Case 1:16-cv MJW Document 1 Filed 02/09/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case: 1:16-cv WOB Doc #: 4 Filed: 06/03/16 Page: 1 of 12 PAGEID #: 15

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN GREEN BAY DIVISION

Case 3:16-cv JST Document 65 Filed 12/07/18 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Plaintiff, COLLECTIVE ACTION v. PURSUANT TO 29 U.S.C. 216(b)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NO.: 1. BREACH OF IMPLIED CONTRACT 2. TRESPASS TO CHATTEL

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA. Case No. CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

Case 3:18-cv Document 1 Filed 10/03/18 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

Case 3:11-cv JAH-WMC Document 38 Filed 10/12/12 Page 1 of 5

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING NO.

(212) (212) (fax) Attorneysfor Named Plaintiff proposed FLSA Collective Plaintiffs, and proposed Class

Case 2:16-cv RLR Document 93 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/19/2018 Page 1 of 13

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION. Case No. COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE DIVISION. v. CASE NO. 15-CV-1588

231 F.R.D. 397 United States District Court, C.D. California.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 08/30/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1. No.: Defendants.

Case: 4:14-cv ERW Doc. #: 221 Filed: 01/18/17 Page: 1 of 13 PageID #: 3025

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/27/16 Page 1 of 15

Case 3:15-cv DRH-DGW Document 8 Filed 07/23/15 Page 1 of 8 Page ID #21 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

In the United States Court of Federal Claims

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

Case 3:13-cv RBL Document 426 Filed 12/05/16 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

4:13-cv TGB-DRG Doc # 39 Filed 04/10/15 Pg 1 of 16 Pg ID 429 3UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the putative class.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. Plaintiff, Case No. 05-cv-777-JPG MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

0:17-cv JMC Date Filed 08/18/17 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

United States District Court Central District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY LOUISVILLE DIVISION

Case: 1:17-cv MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/14/17 Page: 1 of 24 PAGEID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 03/02/18 Page 1 of 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

("FLSA"). This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the New York state law claims, as they. (212) (212) (fax)

Case 1:14-cv DPG Document 97 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/11/2018 Page 1 of 11

Case3:14-cv MEJ Document1 Filed11/24/14 Page1 of 18

Case No. CV GAF(PLAx) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65278

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 02/01/17 Page 1 of 23. Plaintiff,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 04/04/17 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:1

JURISDICTION AND VENUE. 2. This Court has original federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331

Case 3:14-cv DMS-DHB Document 1 Filed 06/04/14 Page 1 of 17

Case 3:12-cv L-BH Document 43 Filed 04/29/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID 611

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Luis Escalante

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA Civil Action 1:16-cv-1080

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

Case 8:19-cv SCB-JSS Document 2 Filed 03/04/19 Page 1 of 7 PageID 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA. January 2004 Term. No

Case: 1:18-cv CAB Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/18/18 1 of 20. PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case 0:17-cv XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/13/2017 Page 1 of 12

11 CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

Case No. 10-CV-5582(FB)(RML) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case: 1:11-cv Document #: 115 Filed: 02/13/15 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1270

they are so related in this action within such original jurisdiction that they form part (212) (212) (fax)

Case 8:18-cv JVS-DFM Document 1-5 Filed 06/22/18 Page 1 of 29 Page ID #:41

Case 8:16-cv Document 1 Filed 03/18/16 Page 1 of 19 Page ID #:1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2 : 08-cv JWL-DJW Document 43 Filed 08/22/2008 Page 1 of 12

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MEMORANDUM OPINION

SECOND AMENDED COLLECTIVE AND CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Transcription:

Case :-cv-00-rsl Document Filed 0// Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 0 ABDIKHADAR JAMA, an individual, JEES JEES, an individual, and MOHAMED MOHAMED, an individual, Plaintiffs, v. GOLDEN GATE AMERICA, LLC, a foreign limited liability company, and EAN HOLDINGS LLC, ENTERPRISE HOLDINGS, INC., a foreign corporation, and VANGUARD AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, a foreign business entity d/b/a NATIONAL CAR RENTAL, ALAMO RENT A CAR, and ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR, Defendants CASE NO. :-cv-00-rsl ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION, APPOINTMENT OF CLASS COUNSEL AND APPOINTMENT OF CLASS REPRESENTATIVE 0 This matter comes before the Court on plaintiffs Motion for Class Certification, Appointment of Class Counsel and Appointment of Class Representative. Dkt. #. The motion is unopposed. Dkt. #. The Court makes the following Finding with respect to Plaintiffs Motion: A. Standard of Review A party seeking to certify a class must establish that the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. CLASS CERTIFICATION AND OTHER RELIEF - th Avenue West, Ste. 00 Seattle, WA (0) -00 / (0) -0 (FAX)

Case :-cv-00-rsl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 are met. Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor, U.S., (). A court must engage in a rigorous analysis to determine whether the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. are satisfied. Gen. Tel. Co. of the Southwest v. Falcon, U.S., (). However, the evidentiary showing need not be extensive. Blackie v. Barrack, F. d, 0 (th Cir. ). B. Plaintiffs have satisfied Fed. R. Civ. P. (a) To be certified under Fed. R. Civ. P. (b)(), Plaintiffs and the proposed Class must first satisfy all the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. (a): One or more members of a class may sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all only if () the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable, () there are questions of law or fact common to the class, () the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class, and () the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.. Numerosity. The Class s size is sufficiently numerous to meet the requirement of numerosity. There are, at least, hundreds of class members in the class. As a general rule a potential class of 0 members is considered impractical to join. Cox v. Am. Cast Iron Pipe Co., F.d, (th Cir.). Accordingly, Plaintiffs have met their burden of showing that the proposed Classes are so numerous that joinder is impracticable.. Commonality A class meets the commonality requirement when the common questions it has raised are apt to drive the resolution of the litigation no matter their number. Jiminez v. Allstate Ins. Co., F.d, (th Cir. 0). Here, Plaintiffs have alleged that Defendant engaged in a common course of conduct by failing to pay the minimum wage mandated by City of SeaTac Ordinance.. CLASS CERTIFICATION AND OTHER RELIEF - th Avenue West, Ste. 00 Seattle, WA (0) -00 / (0) -0 (FAX)

Case :-cv-00-rsl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0 The Class s common questions include: o Whether EAN Holdings was a joint employer of workers primarily employed by Golden Gate. o Whether EAN Holdings had a duty to pay the non-managerial employees it employed jointly with Golden Gate who qualify as Transportation Workers under the Ordinance the minimum hourly wages provided within the Ordinance prior to February, 0. o Whether EAN Holdings willfully withheld the minimum hourly wages provided within the Ordinance. o Whether EAN Holdings failure to pay workers it jointly employed with Golden Gate who qualify as Transportation Workers under the Ordinance the minimum hourly wages provided within the Ordinance constituted a statutory violation. o Whether EAN Holdings was unjustly enriched by withholding the minimum hourly wages provided within the Ordinance. o Whether injured Golden Gate/EAN employees who qualify as Transportation Workers under the Ordinance are entitled to receive punitive or double damages as result of EAN Holdings willful withholding of the minimum hourly wages provided within the Ordinance. Any one of these common questions of fact and law is sufficient to satisfy the Fed. R. Civ. P. (a) commonality requirement.. Typicality The proposed Class Representatives claims are typical of the Class because Plaintiffs claims arise from the same alleged course of conduct and are based on the same legal theories regarding Defendants allegedly wrongful conduct. Each Class member has claims based on the same legal theories as the Plaintiffs, i.e., alleged failure to pay the prevailing minimum wage. Typicality has been interpreted to mean that a class representative must be part of the class and possess the same interest and suffer the same injury as the class members. Falcon, U.S. at (quoting East Texas Motor Freight Sys., Inc., v. Rodriguez, U.S., 0 (). Accordingly, Plaintiffs claims satisfy the typicality requirement of Fed. R. Civ. P.. CLASS CERTIFICATION AND OTHER RELIEF - th Avenue West, Ste. 00 Seattle, WA (0) -00 / (0) -0 (FAX)

Case :-cv-00-rsl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 0. Adequacy The proposed Class Representatives and their counsel will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Class. Plaintiffs have no antagonistic or conflicting interests with absent Class members and Class counsel are experienced in employment litigation and class action practice.. The Requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. (b)() Are Met. This dispute for every member of the proposed Class revolves around questions common to the Class, listed above. Answering those common questions will determine the liability of Defendants to every member of the proposed Class. Accordingly, common questions predominate over individual questions and answering these questions in a single forum would achieve economies of time, effort, and expense, and promote uniformity of decision as to persons similarly situated, without sacrificing procedural fairness or bringing about other undesirable results. Advisory Committee Notes, Rule (b)(). In addition, a class action is superior to other available means for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy. Fed. R. Civ. P. (b)() recites that a court should consider: (A) the interest of members of the class in individually controlling the prosecution or defense of separate actions; (B) the extent and nature of any litigation concerning the controversy already commenced by or against members of the class; (C) the desirability or undesirability of concentrating the litigation of the claims in the particular forum; (D) the difficulties likely to be encountered in the management of a class action. All of these factors favor certification here. Hundreds of Class members bringing individual claims would not conserve time, effort and expense or provide a forum for claimants like those here. Absent Class members are unlikely to have any interest in individually controlling their claims, and the claims of former employees might go unaddressed but for their CLASS CERTIFICATION AND OTHER RELIEF - th Avenue West, Ste. 00 Seattle, WA (0) -00 / (0) -0 (FAX)

Case :-cv-00-rsl Document Filed 0// Page of 0 inclusion in a class action. Defendants have substantial contacts in Washington state and all of the class members live (or have lived) here; therefore this jurisdiction has a particular interest in this matter, making this a desirable location to litigate these claims. IT is, accordingly, hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:. This action shall be maintained as a Class Action under Fed. R. Civ. P. (b)() and on behalf of the following Class: All employees jointly employed by Golden Gate and EAN Holdings who have been Transportation Workers and who worked one or more hours within the City of SeaTac at any time during the time period from January, 0, to August, 0 who can be ascertained from Golden Gate s records as having been paid less than the prevailing minimum wage prescribed by City of SeaTac Ordinance..00 and who have not recovered back wages under separate legal action.. Plaintiffs are appointed Class Representatives.. Plaintiffs counsel are hereby appointed and designated as counsel for the abovementioned Class and are authorized to act on behalf of the members of the Classes. IT IS SO ORDERED. 0 Dated this th day of June, 0. A Robert S. Lasnik United States District Judge CLASS CERTIFICATION AND OTHER RELIEF - th Avenue West, Ste. 00 Seattle, WA (0) -00 / (0) -0 (FAX)