Attorneys fighting for your right to Fair Wages and Fair Treatment across California
Regretfully, this case was decertified in the fall of 2013. We certainly wish the result had been otherwise. We attempted to contact all who might have been effected by the court’s decision. We’re grateful to all of those who assisted us in regard to this case, and wish all of you the best.
We are pleased to announce that our motion for class certification was granted by the court recently.
Teavana is now seeking to have the court’s decision overturned.
IF YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE CLASS (i.e,. if you worked for Teavana in California since December 2007) we can use your help.
Even if we’ve spoken with you before, if you have any new information, or perhaps contact information for fellow class members, we ask that you contact us at your earliest opportunity.
We have attached a copy the Order of the Court by the Honorable Steven J. Kleifield, Judge of the Los Angeles County Superior Court, granting our motion for class certification.
If you have any other questions about the case or your employment, please feel free to call us at 818-547-5200 or 626-795-0205. Thanks very much. We hope to hear from you soon.
On September 30, 2013, the Court granted Defendant Amdocs Inc.’s motion to de-certify the FLSA class. This means that you are no longer part of this case if you opted in. If you wish to pursue your overtime claims under the FLSA against Amdocs, you will need to file an individual action.
If you are interested in doing so, you should act quickly as the statute of limitations on your FLSA claims will begin to run again on November 29, 2013.
If you would like to pursue an individual claim for overtime against Amdocs or have any questions, please feel free contact Tom Falvey at 626-795-0205 or Jim DeSimone or Michael Seplow at 310-396-0731. Of course, you are also free to contact another lawyer of your choice.
Those who signed Severance Agreements Can Still Opt In - until August 9, 2012!
For those people who might be in the class, and who already signed Severance Agreements, you may still be able to Opt In to this Collective Action.
Please call us at 626.795.0205, or the DeSimone, Seplow firm at 319.396.0731 for further information.
THE DEADLINE TO TAKE ACTION IS APRIL 17, 2012. SUBMIT YOUR CONSENT FORM AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
Consent to Join Forms and Notices Have Gone Out!
As you may be aware, recently the Federal Court granted Conditional FLSA Certification of this case. This past week we sent out consent to join forms and notices to all current or former Amdocs employees identified by Amdocs pursuant to the Court's order. If you have not done so already and want to have an opportunity to receive compensation for wage and hour violations alleged in this case, please return your signed consent to join form as soon as possible.
In past cases, we’ve always found that some class members have moved. For those class members who may no longer be employed by Amdocs, for example, their addresses may no longer be correct. Mail, as we're sure you're aware, sometimes is delivered to the wrong address. Thus we want to be sure to let everyone who might be part of this case know of their right to join. Because federal law is different than state law, to participate in this FLSA action you must opt-in as soon as possible.
If you believe you are part of this case and have not received a consent form from our office in the past week, please contact us as soon as possible at 626-795-0205.
We are extremely pleased to announce that the Court recently rejected Amdoc's attempt to dismiss this case, and instead granted Plaintiffs' Motion for Collective Certification under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). In short, the Court ruled completely in Plaintiffs’ favor. While this is not the end of the case, it is very good news.
Consent forms (see attached form and notice) will go out shortly to a group of current and former Amdocs employees (employed since April, 2008) to allow them to participate in this FLSA action. The employees to receive consent forms were defined by the Court in two groups as follows:
All California computer employees of Amdocs who were classified as exempt, and who were employed in the following Amdocs Job Families of 1) System Integration, 2) Development & Technology, 3) Technical Business Operations, and/or 4) Enterprise Support Services, and who were Individual Contributors below the level of Dir-IC, or below the level of Individual Contributors, who primarily performed computer support, trouble shooting, testing related to repairs and problem-solving, and/or other technical services for Amdocs. The “Roles” performed by these similarly situated employees include Sr. Expert, Expert, Sr. SME (Subject Matter Expert), SME, and Associate;
All California computer employees of Amdocs who “transitioned” from AT&T Services, Inc. To Amdocs, who were classified as exempt, and who are not Managers according to the Amdocs Level System and who primarily performed computer support, trouble shooting, testing related to repairs and problem-solving, and/or other technical services for Amdocs.
If you fit into either of these two groups and were employed by Amdocs at any time since April, 2008, we urge you to contact our offices. If you aren't sure, call us!
To participate, you must fill out and return the FLSA consent form before the deadline expires in April of 2012.
PLEASE NOTE: The Court has not yet ruled on whether a class covering California Labor Code claims will also be certified. This latest ruling addressed only federal law under the FLSA.
The court filed its order in regard to defendant's motion seeking to dismiss the complaint in our case.
The result was definitely in favor of the putative class members. While the court determined that we could not proceed with a cause of action for conversion, and further found that the two named plaintiffs were time-barred from asserting a PAGA claim, it allowed the case to continue forward, and denied the remainder of defendant's motion.
We have attached a copy of the order from the court here for your review.
In the meantime, if you believe you might be a member of this class, please contact us for further information. We have also attached a copy of the third amended complaint filed in this case for your review.
In particular, if you held the job title of Analyst, Analyst Expert, Business Analyst, Database Administrator, Defect Manager, Desktop Engineer, Developer, Device Engineer, IT Asset Manager, IT Project Manager, Product Manager, Quality Assurance Engineer, Quality Control Tester/Analyst, Quality Engineer Expert, Rate File Manager, Release Manager, Requirements Analyst, Requirements Engineer, Sales Engineer, Senior Analyst, Senior Desktop Engineer, Senior Infrastructure Subject Matter Expert (SME) Senior Quality Assurance Analyst, Senior Requirements Analyst, Senior Sales Engineer, Senior Software Qualty Engineer, Senior Software Engineer, Senior Test Engineer, Software Configuration Manager, Software Subject Matter Expert (SME) Subject Matter Expert (SME), Technical Writer, Testing Analyst, and Test Engineer, we believe you might be a putative class member in this case.
By the same token, if you know anyone who held any of these job titles since July 16, 2006, we would appreciate hearing from them as well.
Similarly, if you have any information you believe might be helpful in assisting us in this case, we would be grateful for your seeking us out. You never know who you might benefit by assisting us. Thanks very much for whatever you can do to help us and those who are members of this class.
Thanks very much for your consideration.
A proposed class-action lawsuit has been filed by Patrick Santiago ("Plaintiff") against Amdocs, Inc., on behalf of employees of that company who worked in the IT field, who performed job duties which consisted primarily of providing computer support, troubleshooting and technical services to defendant, and who were misclassified as exempt employees, at any time during the four years preceding the filing of the lawsuit on July 16, 2010. The case is entitled Patrick Santiago, et al, v. Amdocs, Inc., et al, Case No. RG10525874 (Alameda County Superior Court).
In this lawsuit, filed on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff Santiago contends that Amdocs, Inc. did not comply with the requirements under Federal and California law for payment of wages. If successful, a class action allows former and current employees to receive back wages that are owed to them.
The court has not yet ruled on any of Plaintiff's allegations or determined whether the case is appropriate for class action status.
If you worked for Amdocs, Inc., employed in the State of California since July 10, 2006, we would like to speak with you.
Please contact us by either calling our office at 626.795.0205, by mailing us at 550 North Brand Blvd., Suite 1500, Glendale, California 91203, or by emailing us at email@example.com.
The Law Offices of Thomas W. Falvey
Thomas W. Falvey, Esq
Telephone: (626) 795-0205
DISCLAIMER: The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for individual advice regarding your own situation.
The logos and trademarks used on this site are the property of their respective owners.
ADDRESS: 550 North Brand Blvd., Suite 1500, Glendale, California 91203 | P: 818-547-5200 or 626-795-0205