Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Jess Batiz, et al v. American Commercial

March 9, 2011

JESS BATIZ, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
AMERICAN COMMERCIAL SECURITY SERVICES, ET. AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: VIRGINIA A. Phillips United States District Judge

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN PART

Before the Court is a "Motion for Summary Judgment of the Claims of Plaintiff Gordon Narayan and Partial Summary Judgment as to Relevant Dates Worked by Plaintiff Nicole Nabinett" ("Motion") filed by Defendants American Continental Security Services, ABM Industries, Inc., ABM Security Services, and Security Services of America (collectively, "Defendants"). After consideration of the papers in support of, and opposition to, the Motion, and arguments advanced at the March 7, 2011, hearing, the Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion in part.

I. BACKGROUND

A. Procedural History

The parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this action, and the Court need not repeat it here, with limited exception. On January 17, 2008,*fn1 Plaintiffs filed their Fourth Amended Complaint ("FAC"), identifying Nicole Nabinett ("Nabinett") and Gordon Narayan ("Narayan") as named Plaintiffs. (See Doc. No. 108 (Fourth Am. Compl.) at ¶¶ 27, 30.) On January 17, 2008, the Court also conditionally certified a nationwide class consisting of "[a]ll current or former nonexempt employees of [Defendants], who . . . worked more than forty hours in one work week and failed to receive overtime compensation . . . ." (Doc. No. 106 ("Order Granting in Part and Den. in Part Pls.' Mot. for Conditional Class Certification") at 16.)

On September 22, 2010, the Court decertified the class on fairness and procedural grounds, due to Plaintiffs' lack of admissible class-wide damages evidence. (See Sept. 22, 2010, Order at 8-10.) In the September 22, 2010,*fn2 Order, the Court dismissed the opt-in Plaintiffs without prejudice, but permitted the named Plaintiffs, including Nabinett and Narayan, to proceed in their individual capacities. (Id. at 10.)

On September 28, 2010, the Court held a status conference, and ordered, inter alia, that: (1) Plaintiffs could propound additional discovery as to the named Plaintiffs, which must be completed by no later than January 14, 2011; and (2) Plaintiffs and Defendants could file motions for summary judgment no later than January 31, 2011, with oppositions filed no later than February 14, 2011 and replies, if any, filed no later than February 22, 2011. (Doc. No. 229 ("October 12, 2010, Order") at 2.)

Defendants filed the instant Motion on January 31, 2011, attaching the following documents in support of their Motion:

1. Declaration of Lynn Gilbert ("GilbertDeclaration");

2. Printout of an electronic mail message ("e-mail") conversation between Kristine Curtiss and Mark Smith, dated October 26, 2004 ("Ex.A");

3. Payroll Summary Chart for Gordon Narayan ("Ex.B");

4. Printout capturing a screen-shot of Narayan's Employee Master File ("Ex. C");

5. Narayan's Internal Revenue Service Form W-2 for tax year 2004 ("Ex. D");

6. Printout capturing a screen-shot of an Employee Master Inquiry for Nabinett ("Ex. E");

7. Printout capturing a screen-shot of Nabinett's Employee Master File ("Ex. F");

8. Nabinett's Internal Revenue Service Form W-2 for tax year 2005 ("Ex. G");

9. Nabinett's Internal Revenue Service Form W-2 for tax year 2006 ("Ex. H");

10. Payroll Detail Report for Nabinett ("Ex. I")

11. Declaration of Dominic Messiha ("Messiha Declaration");

12. Certified Deposition Transcript for December 16, 2010, Deposition of Gordon Narayan ("Narayan Depo.");

13. Certified Deposition Transcript for December 14, 2010, Deposition of Nicole Nabinett ("Nabinett Depo.");

14. Declaration of Courtney Hobson ("Hobson Decl."); and

15. Defendants' Proposed Statement of Uncontroverted Facts and Conclusions of Law ("SUF").

On February 14, 2011, Plaintiffs filed their Opposition to Defendants' Motion, and attached the following documents:

1. Statement of Genuine Issues of Material Fact ("SGI");

2. Objections to Defendants' Evidence ("Plaintiffs' Objections");

3. Declaration of Andre Jardini ("Jardini Declaration");

4. Plaintiffs' Request for Production of Documents, Set Two, attached as Exhibit 1 to the Jardini Declaration ("Plaintiffs' RFP");

5. Declaration of K.L. Myles ("MylesDeclaration");

6. Transcript Portions from the September 28, 2010, Status Conference ("September 28 Hearing Transcript");

7. Copy of the Court's October 12, 2010, Order ("October 12 Order");

8. Letter to Courtney Hobson from Andre Jardini, dated November 17, 2010 ("Ex. 3");

9. Printout of an e-mail from K.L. Myles to Courtney Hobson, dated November 30, 2010 ("Ex. 4");

10. Declaration of Gordon Naryan, dated July 31, 2007 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.