Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

09-4252 - Briceno et al v. USI Services Group, Inc. et al

Download Files


Document in Context
09-4252 - Briceno et al v. USI Services Group, Inc. et al
August 3, 2010
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Pending before the Court is Plaintiffs' motion to conditionally certify a broader FLSA collective action than the class the Court preliminarily certified on June 6, 2010. For the foregoing reasons, that motion is GRANTED. Accordingly, nunc pro tunc to June 6, 2010, the Court hereby preliminarily certifies an FLSA collective action alleging overtime violations against Defendants, and covering all of Defendants' service employees, regardless of the location where they worked. As in the Court's original certification Order, the class and notice periods run from June 6, 2008 to the present. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 8/3/10. C/ECF (Valle, Christine)
September 28, 2012
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM & ORDER denying 56 Motion to Certify Class. For the foregoing reasons, the Named Plaintiffs' motion is DENIED. However, the Court GRANTS the Named Plaintiffs leave to redefine their proposed class to address all of the issues articulated herein in a renewed motion. The Clerk of the Court is directed to amend the spellings of the Named Plaintiffs' names on the docket to conform to the caption herein. So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 9/28/12. C/ECF (Valle, Christine)
September 29, 2015
PDF | More
ORDER denying 109 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; denying 114 Motion to decertify Class; denying 114 Motion for Summary Judgment: As discussed in the attached M & O, Defendants' motions for summary judgment and decertification of the FLSA Collective are denied. Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment is denied, and its motion to amend the complaint is granted in part, and denied in part. In addition, because his employment at USI pre-dates the FLSA Collective action date, Named Plaintiff Francisco Vargas Aguirre is dismissed from this case. Finally, because USI employees who only worked at Food Circus, Hard Rock Caf, Fooderama, and Boardwalk Hall may not have used or been subject to the telephone or automated timekeeping systems at issue in this case, Defendants shall file, by October 30, 2015, a list of all opt-in Plaintiffs who worked only at one or more of these locations. Plaintiffs shall file a response, by December 18, 2015, including any relevant evidence, explaining why the employees on Defendants list should not be dismissed from this case. Ordered by Judge Pamela K. Chen on 9/29/2015. (Driscoll, Katherine)
January 26, 2016
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM & ORDER granting in part and denying in part 122 Motion for Reconsideration: For the reasons stated in the attached Memorandum & Order, Defendants' motion for reconsideration is DENIED IN PART and GRANTED IN PART. The Court denies the reconsideration motion as to the Court's denial of decertification of the FLSA collective, but grants the reconsideration motion as to the Court's grant of Plaintiffs' motion to amend the Complaint to add the opt-in FLSA collective plaintiffs as Named Plaintiffs and as to its leave to Plaintiffs to renew their Rule 23 class certification motion. The parties shall proceed to trial on the claims certified in the FLSA collective and the State law claims of the Named Plaintiffs. Ordered by Judge Pamela K. Chen on 1/26/2016. (Levanon, Neta)