Jon D.Meer

Reported Trial Court And Appellate Case Decisions

• Kabasele v. Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc., 2022 WL 229856 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 26, 2022) (granting motion to dismiss Second Amended Complaint alleging class action and PAGA claims, on the grounds that the plaintiffs merely listed boilerplate allegations unsupported by specific facts and could not state a “plausible claim” for relief)
• Madeira v. Converse, Inc., 2022 WL 109365 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2022) (granting summary judgment for the employer as to claims for meal and rest period violations, unlawful “rounding” of time punches, and failure to pay the “regular rate” when calculating overtime wages)
• Wilson v. Pactiv LLC, 2021 WL 5818492 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 3, 2021) (denying class certification as to claims alleging “off the clock” work where time paid to employees was less than time recorded on time clocks, unlawful “rounding” of time punches, meal and rest period violations, and failure to pay the “regular rate” when calculating overtime wages)
• Christensen v. Carter's Retail, Inc., 2021 WL 4932244 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 21, 2021) (denying class certification as to all claims brought on behalf of over 8,000 employees, alleging failure to pay for time spent in bag checks/exit inspections and failure to allow off-site rest periods; the court noted that the employer’s written policies provided managerial discretion and found that “a policy of discretion” cannot be a “common policy” as required for class certification)
• In re Southern California Pizza Wage and Hour Cases, 2021 WL 4571227 (Cal. Sup. Ct. September 3, 2021) (granting the employer’s motion for decertification of a class of 42,000 employees of one of the largest Pizza Hut franchisees; the court held that class certification could not be maintained based on the theory that the employer had a policy that did not explicitly tell employees they were allowed to leave the premises for rest periods; court held that an employer’s “silent” policy cannot support class certification, absent classwide evidence of harm)
• In re Southern California Pizza Wage and Hour Cases, 2021 WL 2549103 (Cal. Sup. Ct. June 14, 2021) (denying class certification in a potential class of over 42,000 pizza delivery drivers, claiming that they were not fully reimbursed for the costs of operating their own personal vehicles; court held that an employer does not have to pay the standard mileage rate set by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”), but may merely pay the actual expenses incurred by an employee, even if those actual expenses are lower than the IRS rate; court held that actual expenses involve thousands of individualized inquiries, which require denial of class certification)
• Quinn v. LPL Financial LLC, 2021 WL 3727225 (Cal. Sup. Ct. March 5, 2021) (granting summary judgment for the employer in a case brought on behalf of over 2,000 licensed Series 7 financial advisors who claimed that the recent amendment to the “ABC” test under the California Labor Code was unconstitutional, because it carved-out an exemption for licensed financial professionals, so that they would not be subject to a more rigorous test to determine if they could be classified as independent contractors; court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that the same rigorous test for independent contractor status should be applied across the board, for all professions, without any exemption)
• Morand-Doxzon v. Delaware North Sportservice, Inc., Case no. 3:20-cv-01258-DMS-BLM (S.D. Cal. September 9, 2021) (denying class certification in a case brought on behalf of over 3,000 employees who worked at Petco Park, the San Diego Padres Baseball Stadium; plaintiffs claimed that employees at Petco Park did not receive a net 30 minutes for meal periods or net 10 minutes for rest periods, because they were required to participate in security inspections when re-entering the park; court held that if the security inspection is mandated by a third party or governmental entity, then employees are not “subject to the control” of the employer and, therefore, do not have to be paid; court held that it would be unfair to require employers to pay for time spent in third-party security inspections which are now ever-present at airports, sports stadiums, music venues, state fairs, and schools)
• Morand-Doxzon v. Delaware North Sportservice, Inc., Case no. 3:20-cv-01258-DMS-BLM (S.D. Cal. September 9, 2021) (court denied class certification in a case brought on behalf of employees who worked at Petco Park, the San Diego Padres Baseball Stadium, based on a theory that they were required to complete “new-hire paperwork” before beginning their job, including such things as applications, consent forms and arbitration agreements; court held that plaintiffs had not adequately alleged this theory of liability in their generalized class action complaint, which alleged only a broad claim for “failure to pay for all time worked;” court held that a boilerplate complaint cannot be a basis for claims that were not adequately alleged, but later discovered by opposing counsel)
• Goobich v. Excelligence Learning Corp., 2020 WL 5593011 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 18, 2020) (holding that an employee may be required to pay half of the fees and costs for an arbitrator, if an arbitration agreement requires payment by the employee; the Federal Arbitration Act “requires the court to enforce the arbitration agreement in accordance with its terms;” even if the rules of the American Arbitration Association require an employer to pay all of the fees, the terms of an arbitration agreement still control; “applying the fee schedule of the AAA Employment Rules ‘would impermissibly render the more specific provisions in the arbitration agreement superfluous’”)
• Madeira v. Converse, Inc., 2020 WL 1265428 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 13, 2020) (denying Plaintiff’s motion for class certification in full, involving claims for alleged meal period violations, unlawful meal period waivers, unlawful rest period violations and failure to provide third rest periods, illegal "rounding" of time punches, and failure to include bonuses in the regular rate of pay for overtime)
• Chavez v. Converse, Inc., 2020 WL 1233919 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 13, 2020) (granting partial summary judgment for Defendant as to Plaintiff’s claims for penalties under California Labor Code 203 and 226; holding that a "good faith dispute" exists as to whether time spent in exit inspections or bag checks is compensable, which precludes recovery of penalties)
• Heredia v. Eddie Bauer, LLC, 2020 WL 127489 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 10, 2020) (granting decertification of class action case involving thousands of retail store employees in California, based on claims for unpaid wages for time spent in bag checks and exit inspections)
• Lucas v. Michael Kors (USA) Inc., 2018 WL 6177225 (C.D. Cal. 2018) (granting the employer’s motion to compel arbitration and dismissing all class action claims; the court held that a third party beneficiary may enforce an arbitration agreement, even if it is a non-signatory), affirmed, (9th Cir. April 22, 2019)
• Elguea v. Southern California Pizza Co. LLC, et al., 2018 WL 2949589 (Cal. Court of Appeal 2018) (affirming judgment for the employer; and holding that a settlement in a workers’ compensation case applies to a civil lawsuit for discrimination, harassment and wrongful termination)
• Kizer v. Tristar Risk Management, 13 Cal. App. 5th 830 (2017) (affirming the denial of class certification and holding that plaintiffs must first provide adequate evidence of class-wide damages before a defendant is required to prove a class-wide affirmative defense such as a proper exempt classification)
• Rodriguez v. Nike Retail Services, Inc., 2017 WL 4005591 (ND Cal. 2017) (granting summary judgment for the employer against a class of over 10,000 current and former employees, who claimed they were required to work "off-the-clock" while participating in exit inspections before leaving the employer’s premises; the court held that the time spent in exit inspections was de minimis)
• Chavez v. Converse, Inc., 2017 WL 4398374 (ND Cal. 2017) (granting summary judgment for the employer against a class of 2,000 current and former employees who claimed they were required to work "off-the-clock;" the court held that any alleged unpaid time was de minimis and non-compensable)
• Osman v. Tatitlek Support Services, Inc., 2017 WL 945024 (CD Cal. 2017) (granting summary judgment for the employer as to claims for "off-the-clock" work where employees were required to remain on the employer’s premises and sleep on the employer’s premises; the Court held that a geographic restriction does not constitute compensable "hours worked")
• Galvan v. Michael Kors USA Holdings, Inc., 2017 WL 253985 (CD Cal. 2017) (dismissing wage-related class action claims brought on behalf of warehouse workers and holding that only one plaintiff could pursue wage-related claims through a binding arbitration, based on a class action waiver in an arbitration agreement)
• Payala v. Wipro Technologies, Inc., 2016 WL 6094158 (CD Cal. 2016) (denying class certification for proposed class of approximately 1,500 computer technicians, based on varied job assignments responsibilities and levels of experience)
• Chavez v. Converse, Inc., 2016 WL 4398374 (ND Cal. 2016) (granting summary judgment for the employer in a potential class action, alleging failure to properly pay overtime wages based on the calculation of the "regular rate of pay" to include employee bonuses)
• Southern California Pizza Wage and Hour Cases, 2016 WL 3513505 (Orange County Superior Court 2016) (denying class certification in a case filed on behalf of 25,000 employees of one of the largest franchisees of Pizza Hut restaurants, alleging failure to reimburse expenses for making pizza deliveries; the court denied class certification on the grounds that individualized issues predominated regarding any alleged underpayment of actual expenses incurred by each employee)
• Patel v. Nike Retail Services, Inc., 2016 WL 1241777 (ND Cal. 2016) (denying class certification based on alleged misclassification of over 100 assistant store managers as exempt employees)
• Alvarez v. Hamilton Sundstrand Corp., 2016 WL 1243566 (Los Angeles Superior Court 2016) (granting summary judgment for the employer as to a class of over 1,100 current and former employees alleging misclassification after receiving a pay cut following a three-year furlough program)
• Kizer v. Tristar Risk Mgt., 2015 WL 10372896 (Orange County Superior Court 2015) (denying class certification based on alleged misclassification of over 600 insurance claims examiners as exempt employees)
• Kohler v. Presidio Int’l Inc., 782 F.3d 1064, (9th Cir. 2015) (affirming trial victory for the defendant in a disability discrimination case, and vacating and remanding part of the verdict for application of new legal precedent)
• Feezor v. Hanesbrands Direct, LLC, 596 Fed. App. 558 (9th Cir. 2015) (affirming summary judgment against a disability discrimination claim brought under Title III of the ADA)
• Bicek v. C&S Wholesale Grocers, Inc., 2014 WL 1415974 (ED Cal. 2014) (granting the employer’s preemptive motion to deny class certification as to all class-wide claims for "misclassification" of exempt employees, unpaid overtime, failure to pay minimum wage, failure to provide meal periods, failure to authorize and permit rest periods, failure to provide itemized and accurate wage statements, failure to pay accrued wages at the time of termination, and PAGA penalties)
• Yardley v. ADP Total Source, Inc., 2014 WL 1494105 (CD Cal. 2014) (granting summary judgment for the employer on former human resources employee’s claims for constructive discharge, intentional infliction of emotional distress and punitive damages)
• Cagle v. C&S Wholesale Grocers, Inc., 505 B.R. 534 (ED Cal. 2014) (granting dismissal of wage-related claims based on the plaintiff’s failure to disclose his lawsuit in connection with bankruptcy proceedings)
• Martinez v. Columbia Sportswear USA Corp., 553 Fed.App. 760, 2014 WL 293035 (9th Cir. 2014) (affirming summary judgment for the defendant and holding that a business can lawfully provide an "equivalent facilitation" for disabled patrons even if there are architectural barriers to access)
• Bicek v. C&S Wholesale Grocers, Inc., 2013 WL 5425345 (E.D. Cal. 2013) (granting the employer’s motion for a protective order to prohibit the depositions of top-level executives in a putative wage and hour class action)
• Kohler v. Presidio Int’l, Inc., 2013 WL 1246801 (CD Cal. 2013) (judgment for the defendant following the trial, in case alleging Title III ADA violations at a national claim of retail stores)
• Alcala v. Best Buy Stores, L.P., 2012 WL 6138332 (CD Cal. 2012) (granting summary judgment for the employer on claims for discrimination in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act, Family Medical Leave Act and California Family Rights Act; granting summary judgment for the employer on claims of retaliation in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act and wrongful termination in violation of public policy; granting summary judgment for the employer on claims for failure to prevent harassment and discrimination; granting summary judgment for the employer on claims for failure to provide reasonable accommodation and failure to engage in the interactive process to determine alternative accommodations)
• Jones v. Spherion Staffing, LLC, 2012 WL 3264081 (CD Cal. 2012) (putative class action case brought on behalf of approximately 23,000 employees and former employees of a temporary staffing agency; the court granted the employer’s motion for judgment on the pleadings as to class action claims for alleged meal and rest period violations, failure to provide accurate wage statements, failure to pay all wages due at the time of termination of employment and unfair competition)
• Martinez v. Columbia Sportswear USA Corp., 859 F. Supp. 2d 1174 (ED Cal. 2012) (summary judgment in favor of defendant on ADA accessibility claims and related state law claims), affirmed (9th Cir., January 28, 2014)
• Feezor v. Patterson, et al., 896 F. Supp. 2d 895 (ED Cal. 2012) (summary judgment granted for multiple defendants in a case involving approximately 30 claims of unlawful conduct in violation of federal and state law)
• Nguyen v. Baxter Healthcare Corp., 2011 WL 6018284 (CD Cal. 2011) (granting summary judgment against the class representative and dismissing entire class action alleging meal period violations, claims for penalties under California Labor Code section 226, restitution under the California Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and penalties under the California Private Attorney General Act (PAGA); also denying Plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment)
• Nguyen v. Baxter Healthcare Corp., 275 F.R.D. 596, 2011 WL 2183993 (CD Cal. 2011) (denying plaintiff’s request for class-wide discovery prior to seeking certification and limiting discovery requests to only the location where the class representative worked)
• Osborne v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America, Inc., 2010 WL 4103680 (CD Cal. 2010) (defeated conditional class certification in a nationwide FLSA lawsuit alleging failure to pay overtime and off-the-clock work involving call center employees; summary judgment was then granted against the class representative)
• Yip v. Unite Here Pension Fund, 2010 WL 2816061 (SD Cal. 2010) (granting motion to dismiss and denying plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of dismissal of ERISA claims in a class action for failure to pay employee benefits)
• Jones v. Wild Oats Markets, Inc., 467 F. Supp. 2d 1004, 1013, 1016 (SD Cal. 2006) (awarding attorneys’ fees to defendant; the court stated "Mr. Meer has set forth evidence that he is considered a leading practitioner in his field;" "There is no doubt that counsel has special skill and experience and that the quality of representation was excellent in this case")
• Bradley, et al. v. Networkers International LLC, 2009 WL 265531 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. 2009), review granted, California Supreme Court (2009) (denying class certification in case alleging violations of the California Labor Code for unpaid overtime, missed meal and rest periods and related penalties as well as injunctive relief and restitution under the California Unfair Competition Law)
• Hodge v. Superior Court, 145 Cal. App. 4th 278 (2006) (holding that there is no right to a jury trial in a class action for unpaid wages brought under the California Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq.)
• Goldberg v. LDDS WorldCom, 124 Fed. App. 577 (9th Cir. 2005) (affirming summary judgment for an employer sponsored benefit plan covering 10,000 plan participants on the issue that certain pre-existing medical conditions were properly excluded)
• Valdez v. Clayton Industries, Inc., 2002 WL 31769424 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 2002) (affirming summary adjudication for the employer for claim of sexual harassment)
• Magallanes v. Telemundo Network, Inc., 2002 WL 31029235 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 2002) (reversing and remanding case where plaintiff’s counsel sought multiplier for award of attorneys’ fees for work performed in connection with class action settlement)
• Linsley v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 2001 WL 1383148 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 2001) (affirming summary judgment for the employer in a wrongful termination lawsuit)

Other Recent Significant Engagements and Victories (Client names are confidential)

• Represents four national retail clients as lead counsel for California litigation.
• Represents a dozen Fortune 500 companies as lead counsel for California wage and hour litigation.
• Represented a pharmaceutical company and negotiated the lowest PAGA settlement that was approved by Los Angele Superior Court.
• Represented multiple global retail clients and negotiated some of the lowest class action settlements in California.
• Represented an international oil company in three class action cases for alleged meal and rest period violations; the cases were brought by the United Steelworkers union and International Brotherhood of Electrical workers union; cases settled on very favorable terms, primarily consisting of changes in recordkeeping practices for hourly employees.
• Represented a state-wide chain of 230 convenience stores in two class action cases for alleged unpaid overtime and meal and rest period violations; the court granted summary adjudication as to the overtime claims; plaintiffs then failed to move for class certification on the remaining claims.
• Represented a state-wide chain of 160 convenience stores in a class action case for alleged failure to pay mileage expenses for employees traveling for company business purposes; the court dismissed the class-wide allegations and the case was narrowed to a single plaintiff lawsuit, resulting in a $5,000 settlement.
• Represented a chain of auto parts retailers in a nationwide class action alleging disability access discrimination; class-wide allegations were dismissed by the court and the case was reduced to a single plaintiff lawsuit.
• Represented an international telecommunications company in a class action alleging misclassification of independent contractors, unpaid wages and meal and rest period violations; class certification denied by the court and affirmed by the court of appeal.
• Represented a national ink manufacturing corporation in a case alleging failure to pay overtime wages and meal and rest period violations; judgment was granted in favor of the employer following a 10-day trial.
• Represented a foreign government and its Los Angeles Consulate and Ministry of Foreign Trade in a case alleging discrimination and wrongful termination.
• Represented the chair and president of a prominent national financial services firm, who was accused of sexual harassment and retaliation.
• Represented the chief executive officer of an international publicly-traded company, who was accused of inducing breach of contract and unfair business practices in connection with the termination of a division manager.
• Represented an international chain of quick service restaurants in a class action alleging violation of the California Labor Code based on improper questions contained on job applications.
• Represented a national chain of fitness centers in a claim of gender discrimination for operating "women only" fitness facilities.
• Represented an international automobile company in wage-and-hour audit for exempt and non-exempt job classifications for research, development and design employees.
• Represented an international talent agency in overhaul of human resources and compensation practices for exempt employees.
• Represented a chain of movie theaters in connection with employment-related issues for asset sale of partial operations.
• Represented numerous national retailers in class actions for overtime pay and meal and rest period issues.
• Represented numerous national retailers in claims for disability discrimination based on "accessibility violations" at store facilities.