Complaint Unlimited Fee AppliesCal. Super. - 6th Dist.April 5, 202110 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MANHATTAN BEACH, CA 90266 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC Matthew J. Matern (SBN 159798) Email: mmatem@matemlawgroup.com Tagore O. Subramaniam (SBN 280126) Email: tagore@maternlawgroup.com Julia Z. Wells (SBN 3 14242) Email: jwells@maternlawgroup.com 1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200 Manhattan Beach, California 90266 Telephone: (3 10) 53 1 - 1 900 Facsimile: (3 10) 53 1 - 1 901 Attorneys for PlaintiffKODY WALKER individually, and 0n behalf of others similarly situated E-FILED 4/5/2021 5:32 PM Clerk of Court Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara 21CV379148 Reviewed By: R. Walker SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA CASE No.2 21 CV3791 48 COMPLAINT CLASS ACTION: KODY WALKER, individually, and 0n behalf 0f others similarly situated Plaintiff, VS. D.P.M.S., INC., a Corporation, d/b/a DANCO MACHINE; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants 1. 9‘33”!” >19 9° 9. Failure t0 Provide Required Meal Periods Failure to Provide Required Rest Periods Failure t0 Pay Overtime Wages Failure to Pay Minimum Wages Failure to Pay A11 Wages Due to Discharged and Quitting Employees Failure to Maintain Required Records Failure t0 Furnish Accurate Itemized Wage Statements Failure t0 Indemnify Employees for Necessary Expenditures Incurred in Discharge 0f Duties Unfair and Unlawful Business Practices REPRESENTATIVE ACTION: 10. Penalties under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act, as Representative Action DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN INTRODUCTION PLAINTIFF KODY WALKER (“PLAINTIFF”) an individual, demanding a jury trial, 0n behalf of himself and other persons similarly situated, hereby alleges as follows: JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. The Superior Court of the State of California has jurisdiction in this matter because PLAINTIFF is a resident 0f the State of California, and Defendants D.P.M.S., INC., a Corporation, d/b/a DANCO MACHINE; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, (collectively “DEFENDANTS”), are qualified to do business in California and regularly conduct business in California. Further, no federal question is at issue because the claims are based solely 0n California law. 2. Venue is proper in this judicial district and the County 0f SANTA CLARA, California because PLAINTIFF, and other persons similarly situated, performed work for DEFENDANTS in the County 0fSANTA CLARA, DEFENDANTS maintain offices and facilities and transact business in the County 0f SANTA CLARA, and because DEFENDANTS’ illegal payroll policies and practices which are the subject 0f this action were applied, at least in part, to PLAINTIFF, and other persons similarly situated, in the County of SANTA CLARA. PLAINTIFF 3. PLAINTIFF is a male resident 0f the State 0f California and a former employee 0f DEFENDANTS. 4. PLAINTIFF, on behalf of himself and other similarly situated current and former non-exempt employees of DEFENDANTS in the State 0f California at any time during the four years preceding the filing 0f this action, and continuing While this action is pending, brings this class action to recover, among other things, wages and penalties from unpaid wages earned and due, including but not limited t0 unpaid minimum wages, unpaid and illegally calculated overtime compensation, illegal meal and rest period policies, failure t0 pay all wages due t0 discharged and quitting employees, failure to indemnify employees for necessary expenditures and/or losses incurred in discharging their duties, failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements, failure to maintain required records, and interest, attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses. /// CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE -2- ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN 5. PLAINTIFF brings this action 0n behalf of himself and the following similarly situated class 0f individuals (“CLASS MEMBERS”): all current and former non-exempt employees ofDEFENDANTS in the State 0f California at any time Within the period beginning four (4) years prior to the filing of this action and ending at the time this action settles or proceeds to final judgment (the “CLASS PERIOD”). PLAINTIFF reserves the right t0 name additional class representatives. DEFENDANTS 6. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that DEFENDANT D.P.M.S., INC., a Corporation, d/b/a DANCO MACHINE is, and at all times relevant hereto was, a corporation organized and existing under the laws 0f the State 0f California. PLAINTIFF is further informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that DEFENDANT D.P.M.S., INC, a Corporation, d/b/a DANCO MACHINE is authorized to conduct business in the State 0f California, and does conduct business in the State 0f California. Specifically, DEFENDANT D.P.M.S., INC., a Corporation, d/b/a DANCO MACHINE maintains offices and facilities and conducts business in, and engages in illegal payroll practices 0r policies in, the County 0f SANTA CLARA, State 0f California. 7. The true names and capacities 0f DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, are unknown t0 PLAINTIFF at this time, and PLAINTIFF therefore sues such DOE Defendants under fictitious names. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that each Defendant designated as a DOE is in some manner highly responsible for the occurrences alleged herein, and that PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS’ injuries and damages, as alleged herein, were proximately caused by the conduct of such DOE Defendants. PLAINTIFF Will seek leave of the court to amend this Complaint t0 allege their true names and capacities 0f such DOE Defendants when ascertained. 8. At all relevant times herein, DEFENDANTS were the joint employers 0f PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon allege, that at all times material t0 this complaint DEFENDANTS were the alter egos, divisions, affiliates, integrated enterprises, joint employers, subsidiaries, parents, principals, related entities, co- conspirators, authorized agents, partners, joint venturers, and/or guarantors, actual or ostensible, 0f each other. Each Defendant was completely dominated by his, her 0r its co-Defendant, and each CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE -3- ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN was the alter ego of the other. 9. At all relevant times herein, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS were employed by DEFENDANTS under employment agreements that were partly written, partly oral, and partly implied. In perpetrating the acts and omissions alleged herein, DEFENDANTS, and each of them, acted pursuant t0, and in furtherance 0f, their policies and practices of not paying PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS all wages earned and due, through methods and schemes Which include, but are not limited to, failing to pay overtime premiums; failing to provide rest and meal periods; failing to properly maintain records; failing to provide accurate itemized statements for each pay period; failing t0 properly compensate PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS for necessary expenditures; and requiring, permitting or suffering the employees to work off the clock, in Violation 0f the California Labor Code and the applicable Welfare Commission (“IWC”) Orders. 10. PLAINTIFF is informed and believes, and thereon allege, that each and every one 0f the acts and omissions alleged herein were performed by, and/or attributable t0, all DEFENDANTS, each acting as agents and/or employees, and/or under the direction and control 0f, each 0f the other DEFENDANTS, and that said acts and failures t0 act were Within the course and scope 0f said agency, employment and/or direction and control. 11. Pursuant t0 California Labor Code § 558.1, DEFENDANTS and any person acting 0n behalf ofany ofthe DEFENDANTS, are liable for Violating, or causing to Violate, any provision regulating minimum wages 0r hours and days of work in any order of the Industrial Welfare Commission, 0r Labor Code §§ 203, 226, 226.7, 1193.6, 1194, 0r 2802. 12. As a direct and proximate result of the unlawful actions of DEFENDANTS, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS have suffered, and continue t0 suffer, from loss 0f earnings in amounts as yet unascertained, but subject to proof at trial, and Within the jurisdiction 0f this Court. CLASS ACTION DESIGNATION 13. This action is appropriately suited for a Class Action because: a. The potential class is a significant number. Joinder 0f all current and former employees individually would be impractical. CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE -4- ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN b. This action involves common questions 0f law and fact t0 the potential class because the action focuses 0n DEFENDANTS’ systematic course of illegal payroll practices and policies, Which was applied t0 all non-exempt employees in Violation 0f the Labor Code, the applicable IWC wage order, and the Business and Professions Code Which prohibits unfair business practices arising from such Violations. c. The Claims 0f PLAINTIFF are typical 0f the class because DEFENDANTS subjected all non-exempt employees t0 identical Violations 0f the Labor Code, the applicable IWC wage order, and the Business and Professions Code. d. PLAINTIFF is able t0 fairly and adequately protect the interests 0f all members of the class because it is in his best interests to prosecute the claims alleged herein to obtain full compensation due t0 them for all services rendered and hours worked. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Failure t0 Provide Required Meal Periods [Ca]. Labor Code §§ 226.7, 510, 512, 1194, 1197; IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001, § 11] (Against all DEFENDANTS) 14. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference, as though fully set forth, the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs. 15. During the CLASS PERIOD, as part 0fDEFENDANTS’ illegal payroll policies and practices t0 deprive their non-exempt employees all wages earned and due, DEFENDANTS required, permitted 0r otherwise suffered PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS to take less than the 30-minute meal period, or to work through them, and have failed to otherwise provide the required meal periods to PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS pursuant t0 California Labor Code §226.7, 512 and IWC Order N0. 1-2001, § 11. 16. DEFENDANTS further violated California Labor Code §§ 226.7 and IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001, § 11 by failing t0 compensate PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS who were not provided With a meal period, in accordance With the applicable wage order, one additional hour 0f compensation at each employee’s regular rate 0f pay for each workday that a meal period was not provided. CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE -5- ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN 17. DEFENDANTS further violated California Labor Code §§ 226.7, 510, 1194, 1197, and IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001 by failing to compensate PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS for all hours worked during their meal periods. 18. As a proximate result of the aforementioned Violations, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS have been damaged in an amount according t0 proof at trial, and seek all wages earned and due, interest, penalties, expenses, and costs 0f suit. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION Failure t0 Provide Required Rest Periods [Ca]. Labor Code §§ 226.7, 512; IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001, § 12] (Against all DEFENDANTS) 19. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference, as though fully set forth, the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs. 20. At all times relevant herein, as part 0fDEFENDANTS’ illegal payroll policies and practices t0 deprive their non-exempt employees all wages earned and due, DEFENDANTS failed t0 provide rest periods t0 PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS as required under California Labor Code §§ 226.7 and 512, and IWC Wage Order No. 1-2001, § 12. 21. DEFENDANTS further violated California Labor Code § 226.7 and IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001, § 12 by failing t0 pay PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS who were not provided with a rest period, in accordance with the applicable wage order, one additional hour of compensation at each employee’s regular rate 0f pay for each workday that a rest period was not provided. 22. As a proximate result of the aforementioned Violations, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS have been damaged in an amount according t0 proof at trial, and seek all wages earned and due, interest, penalties, expenses, and costs of suit. /// /// /// /// CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE -6- ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION Failure t0 Pay Overtime Wages [Cal. Labor Code §§ 510, 1194, 1198; IWC Wage Order No. 1-2001, § 3] (Against all DEFENDANTS) 23. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference, as though fully set forth, the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs. 24. Pursuant to California Labor Code §§ 510, 1194, and IWC Wage Order No. 1-2001, § 3, DEFENDANTS are required to compensate PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS for all overtime, Which is calculated at one and one-half (1 1/2) times the regular rate 0f pay for all hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours per day and/or forty (40) hours per week, and for the first eight (8) hours on the seventh consecutive workday, with double time for all hours worked in excess of twelve (12) hours in any workday and for all hours worked in excess 0f eight (8) hours 0n the seventh consecutive day 0fwork in any workweek. 25. PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS are current and former non-exempt employees entitled t0 the protections 0f California Labor Code §§ 5 10, 1194, and IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001. During the CLASS PERIOD, DEFENDANTS failed t0 compensate PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS for all overtime hours worked as required under the foregoing provisions 0f the California Labor Code and IWC Wage Order by, among other things: failing to pay overtime at one and one-half (1 1/2) or double the regular rate 0f pay as provided by California Labor Code §§ 5 10, 1194, and IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001, § 3; failing t0 factor in all forms 0f remuneration When calculating the regular rate 0f pay for purposes of paying overtime; requiring, permitting or suffering PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS t0 work off the clock; requiring, permitting or suffering PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS t0 work through meal and rest breaks; illegally and inaccurately recording time in which PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS worked; failing t0 properly maintain PLAINTIFF’S and CLASS MEMBERS’ records; failing t0 provide accurate itemized wage statements to PLAINTIFF for each pay period; and other methods t0 be discovered. /// /// CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE -7- ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN 26. In Violation of California law, DEFENDANTS have knowingly and willfully refused t0 perform their obligations to compensate PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS for all wages earned and all hours worked. As a proximate result, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS have suffered, and continue t0 suffer, substantial losses related to the use and enjoyment of such wages, lost interest 0n such wages, and expenses and attorneys’ fees in seeking t0 compel DEFENDANTS to fully perform their obligations under state law, all t0 their respective damages in amounts according to proof at time of trial, and Within the jurisdiction of this Court. 27. DEFENDANTS’ conduct described herein violates California Labor Code §§ 5 10, 1194, 1198 and IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001, § 3. Therefore, pursuant t0 California Labor Code §§ 200, 203, 226, 558, 1194, 1197.1, and other applicable provisions under the California Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS are entitled t0 recover the unpaid balance 0fwages owed t0 them by DEFENDANTS, plus interest, penalties, attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs 0f suit. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION Failure to Pay Minimum Wages [Cal Labor Code §§ 1194, 1197; IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001, § 4] (Against all DEFENDANTS) 28. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference, as though fully set forth, the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs. 29. Pursuant to California Labor Code §§ 1194, 1197, and IWC Wage Order N0. 1- 2001, § 4, payment t0 an employee of less than the applicable minimum wage for all hours worked in a payroll period is unlawful. 30. During the CLASS PERIOD, DEFENDANTS failed t0 pay PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS minimum wages for all hours worked by, among other things: requiring, permitting or suffering PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS t0 work off the clock; requiring, permitting 0r suffering PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS t0 work through meal and rest breaks; illegally and inaccurately recording time in which PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS worked; failing to properly maintain PLAINTIFF’S and CLASS MEMBERS’ records; failing t0 provide CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE -8- ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN accurate itemized wage statements to PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS for each pay period; and other methods to be discovered. 3 1. DEFENDANTS’ conduct described herein violates California Labor Code §§ 1 194, 1197, and IWC Wage Order No. 1-2001, § 4. As a proximate result of the aforementioned Violations, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS have been damaged in an amount according t0 proof at trial. Therefore, pursuant t0 California Labor Code §§ 200, 203, 226, 558, 1194, 1197.1, and other applicable provisions under the Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS are entitled t0 recover the unpaid balance 0f wages owed t0 them by DEFENDANTS, plus interest, penalties, attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs 0f suit. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION Failure t0 Pay All Wages Due t0 Discharged and Quitting Employees [Ca]. Labor Code §§ 201, 202, 203] (Against all DEFENDANTS) 32. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference, as though fully set forth, the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs. 33. Pursuant t0 California Labor Code § 201, 202, and 203, DEFENDANTS are required t0 pay all earned and unpaid wages to an employee Who is discharged. California Labor Code § 201 mandates that if an employer discharges an employee, the employee’s wages accrued and unpaid at the time ofdischarge are due and payable immediately. In addition, pursuant to Labor Code § 227.3, an employer is also required t0 pay an employee all earned and unused vacation paid at separation 0f employment as wages at his or her final rate 0f pay. 34. Furthermore, pursuant t0 California Labor Code § 202, DEFENDANTS are required t0 pay all accrued wages due t0 an employee n0 later than 72 hours after the employee quits his 0r her employment, unless the employee provided 72 hours previous notice of his or her intention to quit, in which case the employee is entitled to his 0r her wages at the time of quitting. /// /// /// CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE -9- ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN 35. California Labor Code § 203 provides that if an employer willfully fails t0 pay, in accordance with California Labor Code §§ 201 and 202, any wages of an employee who is discharged or Who quits, the employer is liable for waiting time penalties in the form of continued compensation t0 the employee at the same rate for up to 3O workdays. 36. During the CLASS PERIOD, DEFENDANTS have willfully failed t0 pay accrued wages and other compensation t0 PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS in accordance With California Labor Code §§ 201 and 202. 37. As a result, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS are entitled to all available statutory penalties, including the waiting time penalties provided in California Labor Code § 203, together with interest thereon, as well as other available remedies. 38. As a proximate result 0f DEFENDANTS’ unlawful actions and omissions, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS have been deprived 0f compensation in an amount according t0 proof at the time oftrial, but in excess 0fthe jurisdiction 0fthis Court, and are entitled t0 recovery of such amounts, plus interest thereon, and attorneys’ fees and costs, pursuant t0 California Labor Code §§ 1194 and 2699. SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION Failure t0 Maintain Required Records [Ca]. Labor Code §§ 226; IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001, § 7] (Against all DEFENDANTS) 39. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference, as though fully set forth, the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs. 40. During the CLASS PERIOD, as part 0fDEFENDANTS’ illegal payroll policies and practices to deprive PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS 0f all wages earned and due, DEFENDANTS knowingly and intentionally failed to maintain records as required under California Labor Code §§ 226, 1174, and IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001, § 7, including but not limited to the following records: total daily hours worked by each employee; applicable rates 0f pay; all deductions; meal periods; time records showing when each employee begins and ends each work period; and accurate itemized statements. CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE - 1 0- ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN 41. As a proximate result 0f DEFENDANTS’ unlawful actions and omissions, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS have been damaged in an amount according t0 proof at trial, and are entitled to all wages earned and due, plus interest thereon. Additionally, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS are entitled t0 all available statutory penalties, including but not limited to civil penalties pursuant to California Labor Code §§ 226(6), 226.3, and 1174.5, and an award 0f costs, expenses, and reasonable attorneys’ fees, including but not limited t0 those provided in California Labor Code § 226(6), as well as other available remedies. SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION Failure t0 Furnish Accurate Itemized Wage Statements [Ca]. Labor Code §§ 226, 1174; IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001, § 7] (Against all DEFENDANTS) 42. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference, as though fully set forth, the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs. 43. During the CLASS PERIOD, DEFENDANTS routinely failed t0 provide PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS With timely, accurate, and itemized wage statements in writing showing each employee’s gross wages earned, total hours worked, all deductions made, net wages earned, the name and address 0f the legal entity 0r entities employing PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS, and all applicable hourly rates in effect during each pay period and the corresponding number 0f hours worked at each hourly rate, in Violation of California Labor Code § 226 and IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001, § 7. 44. During the CLASS PERIOD, DEFENDANTS knowingly and intentionally failed to provide PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS With timely, accurate, and itemized wage statements in accordance With California Labor Code § 226(a). 45. As a proximate result 0f DEFENDANTS’ unlawful actions and omissions, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS have been damaged in an amount according t0 proof at trial, and seek all wages earned and due, plus interest thereon. Additionally, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS are entitled t0 all available statutory penalties, including but not limited to civil penalties pursuant t0 California Labor Code §§ 226(6), 226.3, and 1174.5, and an award of costs, CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE -1 1- ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN expenses, and reasonable attorneys’ fees, including but not limited to those provided in California Labor Code § 226(6), as well as other available remedies. EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION Failure t0 Indemnify Employees for Necessary Expenditures Incurred in Discharge 0f Duties [Ca]. Labor Code § 2802] (Against all DEFENDANTS) 46. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference, as though fully set forth, the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs. 47. California Labor Code § 2802(a) requires an employer to indemnify an employee for all necessary expenditures or losses incurred by the employee in direct consequence of the discharge of his 0r her duties, 0r 0f his 0r her obedience t0 the directions 0f the employer. 48. During the CLASS PERIOD, DEFENDANTS knowingly and willfully failed t0 indemnify PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS for all business expenses and/or losses incurred in direct consequence 0f the discharge 0f their duties While working under the direction of DEFENDANTS, including but not limited to expenses associated With the use of personal cell phones and/or personal vehicles for work purposes, uniform items/protective equipment, and other employment-related expenses, in Violation of California Labor Code § 2802. 49. As a proximate result 0f DEFENDANTS’ unlawful actions and omissions, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS have been damaged in an amount according t0 proof at trial, and seek reimbursement of all necessary expenditures, plus interest thereon pursuant to California Labor Code § 2802(b). Additionally, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS are entitled to all available statutory penalties and an award 0f costs, expenses, and reasonable attorneys’ fees, including those provided in California Labor Code § 2802(0), as well as other available remedies. /// /// /// /// CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE - 1 2- ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION Unfair and Unlawful Business Practices [Ca]. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200 et. seq.] (Against all DEFENDANTS) 50. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference, as though fully set forth, the allegations in the foregoing paragraphs. 51. Each and every one 0f DEFENDANTS’ acts and omissions in Violation 0f the California Labor Code and/or the applicable IWC Wage Order as alleged herein, including but not limited to DEFENDANTS’ failure and refusal t0 provide required meal periods, DEFENDANTS’ failure and refusal t0 provide required rest periods, DEFENDANTS’ failure and refusal t0 pay overtime compensation, DEFENDANTS’ failure and refusal t0 pay minimum wages, DEFENDANTS’ failure and refusal t0 pay all wages due t0 discharged 0r quitting employees, DEFENDANTS’ failure and refusal t0 furnish accurate itemized wage statements; DEFENDANTS’ failure and refusal to maintain required records, DEFENDANTS’ failure and refusal to indemnify PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS for necessary expenditures and/or losses incurring in discharging their duties, constitutes an unfair and unlawful business practice under California Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq. 52. DEFENDANTS’ Violations 0f California wage and hour laws constitute a business practice because DEFENDANTS’ aforementioned acts and omissions were done repeatedly over a significant period of time, and in a systematic manner, to the detriment 0fPLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS. 53. DEFENDANTS have avoided payment 0f wages, overtime wages, meal periods, rest periods, and other benefits as required by the California Labor Code, the California Code of Regulations, and the applicable IWC Wage Order. Further, DEFENDANTS have failed t0 record, report, and pay the correct sums 0f assessment t0 the state authorities under the California Labor Code and other applicable regulations. /// /// CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE - 1 3- ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN 54. As a result 0f DEFENDANTS’ unfair and unlawful business practices, DEFENDANTS have reaped unfair and illegal profits during the CLASS PERIOD at the expense ofPLAINTIFF, CLASS MEMBERS, and members 0fthe public. DEFENDANTS Should be made t0 disgorge their ill-gotten gains and t0 restore them to PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS. 55. DEFENDANTS’ unfair and unlawful business practices entitle PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS to seek preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, including but not limited t0 orders that DEFENDANTS account for, disgorge, and restore to PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS the wages and other compensation unlawfully withheld from them. PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS are entitled t0 restitution 0f all monies t0 be disgorged from DEFENDANTS in an amount according t0 proof at the time 0f trial, but in excess of the jurisdiction 0f this Court. TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION Representative Action for Civil Penalties [Ca]. Labor Code §§ 2698-26995] (Against All DEFENDANTS) 56. PLAINTIFF incorporates herein by specific reference as though fully set forth the allegations in all preceding paragraphs, With exception of the allegations in paragraph 13 and the subparagraphs thereto. 57. PLAINTIFF is an “aggrieved employee” within the meaning 0f California Labor Code § 2699(0), and a proper representative to bring a civil action on behalf of himself and other current and former employees 0fDEFENDANTS pursuant t0 the procedures specified in California Labor Code § 2699.3, because PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS were employed by DEFENDANTS and the alleged Violations of the California Labor Code were committed against PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS. 58. Pursuant t0 the California Private Attorneys General Act 0f 2004 (“PAGA”), Labor Code §§ 2698-26995, PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBBERS seeks t0 recover civil penalties, including but not limited to penalties under California Labor Code §§ 2699, 210, 226.3, 558, 1174.5, 1197.1, and IWC Wage Order No. 1-2001, § 20, from DEFENDANTS in a representative action for the Violations set forth above, including but not limited t0 Violations of California Labor CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE - 1 4- ACTION COMPLAINT 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN Code §§ 201, 202, 203, 204, 226, 226.7, 510, 512, 1174, 1174(d), 1174.5, 1194, 1197, 1197.1, 1198, 1199 and 2802. PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS are also entitled to an award 0f reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant t0 California Labor Code § 2699(g)(1). 59. Pursuant to California Labor Code §§ 2699.3, PLAINTIFF gave written notice on January 28, 2021 by online filing to the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (“LWDA”) and by certified mail t0 DEFENDANTS 0f the specific provisions 0f the California Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders alleged to have been violated, including the facts and theories t0 support the alleged Violations. More than sixty-five (65) days have passed and the LWDA has not provided notice t0 PLAINTIFF that it intends t0 investigate the alleged Violations. 60. Therefore, PLAINTIFF has complied with all 0f the requirements set forth in California Labor Code § 2699.3 to commence a representative action under PAGA. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, respectfully prays for relief against DEFENDANTS and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, and each of them, as follows: 1. For compensatory damages in an amount to be ascertained at trial; 2. For restitution 0f all monies due to PLAINTIFF and CLASS MEMBERS, as well as disgorged profits from DEFENDANTS’ unfair and unlawful business practices; 3. For meal and rest period compensation pursuant to California Labor Code § 226.7 and IWC Wage Order N0. 1-2001 ; 4. For liquidated damages pursuant to California Labor Code §§ 1194.2 and 1197. 1; 5. For preliminary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining DEFENDANTS from Violating the relevant provisions 0f the California Labor Code and the IWC Wage Orders, and from engaging in the unlawful business practices complained of herein; 6. For waiting time penalties pursuant t0 California Labor Code § 203; 7. For statutory and civil penalties according t0 proof, including but not limited t0 all penalties authorized by the California Labor Code §§ 226(e) and §§ 2698-26995; /// CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE - 1 5- ACTION COMPLAINT UIAUJN \OOOQON 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN 8. For interest on the unpaid wages at 10% per annum pursuant to California Labor Code §§ 218.6, 1194, 2802, California Civil Code §§ 3287, 3288, and/or any other applicable provision providing for pre-judgment interest; 9. For reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant t0 California Labor Code §§ 1 194, 2699, 2802, California Civil Code § 1021.5, and any other applicable provisions providing for attorneys’ fees and costs; 10. For declaratory relief; 11. For an order requiring and certifying the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Causes of Action as a class action; 12. For an order appointing PLAINTIFF as class representative, and PLAINTIFF’S counsel as class counsel; and 13. For such further relief that the Court may deem just and proper. DATED: April 5’ 2021 Respectfully submitted, MATERN LAW GROUP, PC Matthew J. Matern Tagore O. Subramaniam Julia Z. Wells Attorneys for Plaintiff KODY WALKER, individually, and on behalf of other persons similarly situated CLAss ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE - 1 6- ACTION COMPLAINT UI$UJN Va 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 ROSECRANS AVENUE, STE 200 MANHATTAN DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL PLAINTIFF hereby demands a jury trial with respect t0 all issues triable of right by jury. DATED: April 5, 2021 Respectfully submitted, MATERN LAW GROUP, PC By: WK" Maffhefi’v I MWeré/ V Tagore O. Subramaniam Julia Z. Wells Attorneys for Plaintiff KODY WALKER, individually, and 0n behalf 0f other persons similarly situated CLASS ACTION AND REPRESENTATIVE -17- ACTION COMPLAINT