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.

Thomas-Byass v. Michael Kors Stores, Inc.

United States District Court, C.D. California

July 17, 2015

PAMELA THOMAS-BYASS
v.
MICHAEL KORS STORES (CALIFORNIA), INC., et al.

CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL

KENLY KIYA KATO, Magistrate Judge.

Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order: Granting in Part and Denying in Part Plaintiff's Motion to Compel and for Sanctions (ECF No. 31)

I.

SUMMARY OF RULING

For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendant Michael Kors Stores (California), Inc. to provide further responses to Requests for Production, Set One, Nos. 2-5, 7 and for Sanctions as Expenses in the Sum of $1, 580.00 ("Motion"), filed on July 9, 2015.

The hearing set for July 30, 2015 (Dkt. 31), is hereby VACATED.

II.

RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On December 23, 2014, Plaintiff Pamela Thomas-Byass ("Plaintiff") filed a Class Action Complaint in San Bernardino Superior Court against Defendant Michael Kors Stores (California), Inc. ("Defendant") on behalf of herself and all persons who are or previously were employed by Defendant as Shop Managers in California and were classified as exempt from overtime wages. ECF Docket No. ("Dkt.") 5 at 7-41. The Complaint alleged: (1) unfair competition in violation of California Business and Professions Code §§ 17200, et seq.; (2) failure to pay overtime compensation in violation of California Labor Code §§ 510, 1194, and 1198, et seq.; (3) failure to provide accurate itemized statements in violation of California Labor Code § 226; (4) failure to reimburse employees for required expenses in violation of California Labor Code § 2802; and (5) failure to provide wages when due in violation of California Labor Code §§ 201, 202, and 203. Id. On February 27, 2015, Defendants removed the action to this Court. Dkt. 1.

On April 6, 2015, Plaintiff served Requests for Production, Set One. Dkt. 31-2 at 4-17.

On April 28, 2015, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to file a First Amended Complaint amending the class definition to include all persons who are or previously were employed by Defendant in California classified as non-exempt employees and alleging (1) unfair competition in violation of California Business and Professions Code §§ 17200, et seq.; (2) failure to pay overtime wages in violation of California Labor Code §§ 510, et seq.; (3) failure to provide accurate itemized statements in violation of California Labor Code § 226; (4) failure to provide wages when due in violation of California Labor Code §§ 201, 202, and 203; and (5) violation of the Private Attorneys General Act [Labor Code §§ 2698, et seq. ]. Dkt. 21.

On May 11, 2015, Defendant served responses and objections to Plaintiff's Requests for Production, Set One. Dkt. 31-2 at 18-49. The parties exchanged various emails and letters related to alleged deficiencies in Defendant's responses beginning with a letter from Plaintiff on May 28, 2015. Id. at ¶ 5. The parties met and conferred on the phone on June 8. Id. at ¶ 6. On June 29, 2015, Plaintiff submitted her portion of the Joint Stipulation in order to compel further responses. Dkt. 31-3 at ¶ 7.

On July 1, 2015, the Court granted Plaintiff leave to file the First Amended Complaint, and the First Amended Complaint was filed on July 2, 2015. Dkt. 28, 29.

On July 9, 2015, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Compel and for Sanctions. Dkt. 31. Plaintiff also filed supporting declarations and exhibits, including a Joint Stipulation setting forth the position of the parties regarding Requests for Production Nos. 2-5 and 7. Dkt. 31-1 (Joint Stipulation ("Joint Stip.")), 31-2 (Declaration of Victoria Rivapalacio ("Rivapalacio Decl.")), 31-3 (Declaration of Jon Meer ("Meer Decl.")).

On July 16, 2015, Plaintiff filed a Supplemental Memorandum regarding the Motion to Compel along with a Supplemental Declaration of Victoria Rivapalacio ("Suppl. Rivapalacio Decl."). Dkt. 32.

Also on July 16, 2015, Defendant filed a Supplemental Brief in Support of its Opposition to the Motion to Compel along with a Declaration of ...


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.