Lemons v. Superior Protection Services inc
Court Docket Sheet

Eastern District of Arkansas

4:2017-cv-00567 (ared)

ORIGINAL CLASS/COLLECTIVE ACTION COMPLAINT against Superior Protection Services Inc filed by William Lemons. (Fee $400. Receipt Number LIT063536.) Summons issued and returned to counsel for service.

Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 1 of 15 FILED U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SEP 0 6 2017 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS LITTLE ROCK DIVISION ~A~ES9CORMACK, CLERK------------------y ~ DEP CLERK § WILLIAM LEMONS, § Individually and on behalf § Civil Action No. 4:17-CV-6h 7-K &B of all others similarly situated, ~ This case assigned to District Judge BAke t Plaintiff, § and to Magistrate Judge Ketar""f-§ v. § COLLECTIVE ACTION § PURSUANT TO 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) SUPERIOR PROTECTION SERVICES, INC. § D/B/AADVERT GROUP USA § CLASS ACTION PURSUANT TO § FED. R. CIV. P. 23 Defendant. § __________________ § ORIGINAL CLASS/COLLECTIVE ACTION COMPLAINT William Lemons brings this action individually and on behalf of all current and form.er employees (hereinafter ''Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members'') who worked for Defendant Superior Protection Services, Inc., d/b/a Advert Group USA ("Advert Group''), and who were paid a salary, without overtime premiums, from three years preceding the filing of the Original Complaint and through the final disposition of this matter, seeking all available relief, including compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees and costs, pursuant the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA''), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et seq., and pursuant to the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act ("AMWA''), Ark. Code Ann.§ 11-4-201, et seq. Plaintiffs FLSA claim is asserted as a collective action under Section 16(b) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), while his AMWA claims are asserted as a class action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure ("FED. R. CIV. P.'') 23. Original Class/Collective Action Complaint Page 1 Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 2 of 15 I. OVERVIEW 1. This lawsuit includes a collective action pursuant to the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et. seq., and a class action pursuant to the AMWA and FED. R. CIV. P. 23, to recover overtime wages. 2. Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members are those similarly situated persons who worked for Advert Group at any time since September 6, 2014, through the final disposition of this matter, and who were paid a salary, and who did not receive overtime for all hours worked over forty (40) in each workweek. 3. Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members routinely work (and worked) in excess of 40 hours per workweek; however, Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members were not paid overtime of at least one and one-half their regular rates for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours per workweek. 4. The decision by Advert Group not to pay overtime compensation to Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members was neither reasonable nor in good faith. 5. Advert Group knowingly and deliberately failed to compensate Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members overtime of at least one and one-half their regular rates for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours per workweek. 6. Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members did not and currently do not perform work that meets the definition of exempt work under the FLSA or the AMWA. 7. Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members therefore seek to recover all unpaid overtime and other damages owed under the FLSA as a collective action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), and to recover all unpaid overtime and other damages owed under the AMWA as a class action pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 23. Original Class/Collective Action Complaint Page2 Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 3 of 15 8. Plaintiff prays that all similarly situated workers (Putative Class Members) be notified of the existence of this action and to apprise them of their rights and provide them an opportunity to opt-in to this lawsuit. 9. Plaintiff also prays that the Rule 23 class is certified as defined herein and that Plaintiff be designated Class Representative. II. THE PARTIES 10. Plaintiff William Lemons ("Lemons'') worked for Advert Group within the meaning of the FLSA and the AMWA within the relevant three-year period. 11. Plaintiff Lemons did not receive overtime compensation for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours per workweek. 1 12. The Putative Class Members include those current and former employees who worked for Advert Group since September 6, 2014 and have been subjected to the same illegal pay system under which Plaintiff Lemons worked and was paid. 13. Superior Protection Services, Inc. d/b/a Advert Group USA ("Advert Group'') is an Arkansas for-profit corporation and may be served through its registered agent for service: Amber McMunn, 17 Skylar Cove, Cabot, Arkansas 72023. III. JURISDICTION & VENUE 14. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the FLSA claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 as this is an action arising under 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et. seq. 15. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the additional AMWA claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). The written consent of William Lemons is attached hereto as Exhibit "A." Original Class/Collective Action Complaint Page3 Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 4 of 15 16. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Advert Group because the cause of action arose within this District as a result of Advert Group's conduct within this District. 17. Venue is proper in the Eastern District of Arkansas because this is a judicial district where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred. 18. Specifically, Advert Group is headquartered in Cabot, Lonoke County, Arkansas, which is located in this District and Division. 19. Venue is proper in this this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391. IV. ADDITIONAL FACTS 20. Advert Group provides armed and unarmed security and training services2 to clients in Arkansas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama and Tennessee.3 21. To provide their services, Advert Group employed numerous workers-including the individuals that make up the putative or potential class. While exact job titles may differ, these employees were subjected to the same or similar illegal pay practices for similar work in the field of armed and unarmed security and training services. 22. Plaintiff Lemons worked for Advert Group as a security officer from approximately January of 2017 until August of 2017. 23. Advert Group paid Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members a salary but no overtime. Specifically, Plaintiff Lemons was paid $500.00 each week but did not receive overtime compensation at the required rate of time-and-one-half for all hours worked over forty (40) each workweek. 2 ht!p://www.advertgroupusa.com/home.html. 3 ht!p://www.advertgroupusa.com/locations.html. Original Class/Collective Action Complaint Page4 Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 5 of 15 24. Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members' primary job duties included providing armed and unarmed security and training services to Advert Group's clients in Arkansas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama and Tennessee. 25. Although it is well known that security workers like Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members are not exempt from overtime, Advert Group did not pay Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members the additional overtime premium required by the FLSA for hours worked in excess of forty (40) in.a workweek. 26. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members would conduct their day-to-day activities within mandatory and designed parameters and in accordance with pre-determined operational plans created by Advert Group and/or its clients. 27. Upon further information and belief, Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members' daily and weekly activities were routine and largely governed by standardized plans, procedures, and checklists created by Advert Group and/or its clients. 28. Virtually every job function was pre-determined by Advert Group and/or its clients, including the operational plans in place at each job site, the schedule of work, and related work duties. Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members were prohibited from varying their job duties outside of the predetermined parameters. 29. Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members' duties did not (and currently do not) include managerial responsibilities or the exercise of independent discretion or judgment. 30. Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members did not (and currently do not) have the authority to hire or fire other employees, and they were not (and currently are not) responsible for making hiring or firing recommendations. 31. Moreover, Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members did not (and currently do not) supervise two or more employees. Original Class/Collective Action Complaint Pages Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 6 of 15 32. Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members' duties did not (and currently do not) concern work directly related to the management or general business operations of Cole or its customers. 33. The FLSA and the AMWA mandate that overtime be paid at one and one-half times an employee's regular rate of pay. 34. Advert Group denied Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members overtime pay as a result of a widely applicable, illegal pay practice. Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members regularly worked in excess of forty (40) hours per week but never received overtime compensation. 35. Advert Group applied this pay practice despite clear and controlling law that states that the routine duties which were performed by Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members consisted.. of non-exeDJDtwork.. 36. Accordingly, Advert Group's pay policies and practices blatantly violated (and continue to violate) the FLSA and the AMWA. v. CAUSES OF ACTION COUNT ONE (Collective Action Alleging FLSA Violations) A. FLSA COVERAGE 37. All previous paragraphs are incorporated as though fully set forth herein. 38. The FLSA Collective is defined as: ALL CURRENT AND FORMER EMPLOYEES OF SUPERIOR PROTECTION SERVICES, INC. D/B/A ADVERT GROUP USA, AT ANY TIME FROM SEPTEMBER 6, 2014, THROUGH THE FINAL DISPOSITION OF THIS CASE, AND WERE PAID A SALARY BUT DID NOT RECEIVE OVERTIME FOR HOURS WORKED OVER FORTY IN ANY WORKWEEK ("FLSA Collective" or "FLSA Collective Members"). 39. At all times hereinafter mentioned, Advert Group has been an employer within the meaning of Section 3(d) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(d). Original Class/Collective Action Complaint Page6 Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 7 of 15 40. At all times hereinafter mentioned, Advert Group has been an enterprise within the meaning of Section 3(r) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(r). 41. At all times hereinafter mentioned, Advert Group has been an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce within the meaning of Section 3(s)(1) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(s)(1), in that said enterprise has had employees engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, or employees handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods or materials that have been moved in or produced for commerce by any person, or in any closely related process or occupation directly essential to the production thereof, and in that those enterprises have had, and have, an annual gross volume of sales made or business done of not less than $500,000.00 (exclusive of excise taxes at the retail level which are separately stated). 42. During the respective periods of Plaintiff and the FLSA Collective Members' employment by Advert Group, these individuals provided security services for Advert Group and its clients that involved interstate commerce for purposes of the FLSA. 43. In performing the operations hereinabove described, Plaintiff and the FLSA Collective Members were engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce within the meaning of§§ 203(b), 203(i), 203G), 206(a), and 207(a) of the FLSA. 29 U.S.C. §§ 203(b), 203(i), 203G), 206(a), 207(a). 44. Specifically, Plaintiff and the FLSA Collective Members are (or were) non-exempt employees who worked for Advert Group and were engaged in providing armed and unarmed security and training services to clients in Arkansas, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama and Tennessee. 29 u.s.c. § 203G). 45. At all times hereinafter mentioned, Plaintiff and the FLSA Collective Members are (or were) individual employees who were engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce as required by 29 U.S.C. §§ 206-207. Original Class/Collective Action Complaint Page7 Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 8 of 15 46. In violating the FLSA, Advert Group acted willfully, without a good faith basis and with reckless disregard of applicable federal law. 47. The proposed collective of similarly situated employees, i.e. putative collective members sought to be certified pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), is defined in Paragraph 38. 48. The precise size and identity of the proposed class should be ascertainable from the business records, tax records, and/or employee or personnel records of Advert Group. B. FAILURE TO PAY WAGES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FLSA 49. All previous paragraphs are incorporated as though fully set forth herein. 50. Advert Group violated provisions of Sections 7 and 15 of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 207, and 215(a)(2) by employing individuals in an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce within the meaning of the FLSA for workweeks longer than forty (40) hours without compensating such employees for hours worked in excess of forty (40) per workweek at rates at least one and one-half times the regular rates. 51. Plaintiff and the FLSA Collective Members have suffered damages and continue to suffer damages as a result of Advert Group's acts or omissions as described herein; though Advert Group is in possession and control of necessary documents and information from which Plaintiff would be able to precisely calculate damages. 52. Moreover, Advert Group knowingly, willfully and in reckless disregard carried out its illegal pattern of failing to pay Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees overtime compensation. 29 U.S.C. § 255(a). 53. Advert Group knew or should have known its pay practices were in violation of the FLSA. 54. Advert Group is a sophisticated party and employer, and therefore knew (or should have known) its policies were in violation of the FLSA. Original Class/Collective Action Complaint Page8 Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 9 of 15 55. Plaintiff and the FLSA Collective Members, on the other hand, are (and were) unsophisticated laborers who trusted Advert Group to pay overtime in accordance with the law. 56. The decision and practice by Advert Group to not pay overtime was neither reasonable nor in good faith. 57. Accordingly, Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members are entitled to overtime wages for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) in a workweek pursuant to the FLSA in an amount equal to one-and-a-half times their regular rate of pay, plus liquidated damages, attorneys' fees and costs. C. FLSA COLLECTIVE ACTION ALLEGATIONS 58. All previous paragraphs are incorporated as though fully set forth herein. 59. Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), this collective claim is made on behalf of all those who are (or were) similarly situated to Plaintiff. 60. Other similarly situated employees have been victimized by Advert Group's patterns, practices, and policies, which are in willful violation of the FLSA. 61. The FLSA Collective Members are defined in Paragraph 38. 62. Advert Group's failure to pay any overtime compensation results from generally applicable policies and practices, and does not depend on the personal circumstances of the individual FLSA Collective Members. 63. Thus, Plaintiff's experiences are typical of the experiences of the FLSA Collective Members. 64. The specific job titles or precise job requirements of the various FLSA Collective Members does not prevent collective treatment. 65. All of the FLSA Collective Members-regardless of their specific job titles, precise job requirements, rates of pay, or job locations-are entitled to be properly compensated for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours per workweek. Original Class/Collective Action Complaint Page9 Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 10 of 15 66. Although the issues of damages may be individual in character, there is no detraction from the common nucleus of liability facts. Indeed, the FLSA Collective Members are blue-collar security workers entitled to overtime after forty (40) hours in a week. 67. Advert Group employed a substantial number of similarly situated security workers since September 6, 2014. Upon information and belief, these workers are geographically dispersed, residing and working in locations across the United States. Because these workers do not have fixed work locations, they may work in different states across the country in the course of a given year. 68. Absent a collective action, many members of the proposed FLSA collective likely will not obtain redress of their injuries and Advert Group will retain the proceeds of its rampant violations. 69. Moreover, individual litigation would be unduly burdensome to the judicial system. Concentrating the litigation in one forum will promote judicial economy and parity among the claims of the individual members of the classes and provide for judicial consistency. 70. Accordingly, the FLSA collective of similarly situated plaintiffs should be certified as defined as in Paragraph 38 and notice should be promptly sent. COUNT TWO (Class Action Alleging Violations of the AMWA) A. AMWACOVERAGE 71. All previous paragraphs are incorporated as though fully set forth herein. 72. The Arkansas Class is defined as: ALL CURRENT AND FORMER EMPLOYEES OF SUPERIOR PROTECTION SERVICES, INC. D/B/A ADVERT GROUP USA, WHO WORKED IN ARKANSAS AT ANY TIME FROM SEPTEMBER 6, 2014, THROUGH THE FINAL DISPOSITION OF THIS CASE, AND WERE PAID A SALARY BUT DID NOT RECEIVE OVERTIME FOR HOURS WORKED OVER FORTY IN ANY WORKWEEK ("Arkansas Class" or "Arkansas Class Members"). Original Class/Collective Action Complaint Page 10 Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 11 of 15 73. At all times hereinafter mentioned, Advert Group has been an employer within the meaning of the AMWA. 74. At all times hereinafter mentioned, Plaintiff and the Arkansas Class Members have been employees within the meaning of the AMWA. 75. Plaintiff and the Arkansas Class Members were or have been employed by Advert Group since September 6, 2014, and have been covered employees entitled to the protections of the AMWA and were not exempt from the protections of the AMWA. 76. The employer, Advert Group, is not exempt from paying overtime benefits under theAMWA. B. FAILURE TO PAY WAGES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE AMWA 77. All previous paragraphs are incorporated as though fully set forth herein. 78. The AMWA requires that employees, including Plaintiff and the Arkansas Class Members receive "time and one-half' overtime premium compensation for hours worked over forty (40) per week. 79. Plaintiff and the Arkansas Class Members were or have been employed by Advert Group since September 6, 2014, and have been covered employees entitled to the protections of the AMWA. 80. Advert Group is an employer covered by the requirements set forth in the AMWA. 81. Plaintiff and other Arkansas Class Members have not been exempt from receiving overtime benefits under the AMWA. 82. Plaintiff and the Arkansas Class Members worked more than forty (40) hours in workweeks during times relevant to this case, however, Advert Group violated the AMWA by failing to pay Plaintiff and other Arkansas Class Members any overtime premium for hours worked over 40 per week. Original Class/Collective Action Complaint Page 11 Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 12 of 15 83. Plaintiff and the Arkansas Class Members have suffered damages and continue to suffer damages as a result of Advert Group's acts or omissions as described herein; though Advert Group is in possession and control of necessary documents and information from which Plaintiff would be able to precisely calculate damages 84. In violating the AMWA, Advert Group acted willfully, without a good faith basis, and with reckless disregard of applicable Arkansas law. 85. The proposed class of employees, i.e. putative class members sought to be certified pursuant to the AMWA, is defined in Paragraph 72. 86. The precise size and identity of the proposed class should be ascertainable from the business records, tax records, and/or employee or personnel records of Advert Group. C. ARKANSAS CLASS ALLEGATIONS 87. All previous paragraphs are incorporated as though fully set forth herein. 88. Plaintiff brings his Arkansas claims as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 on behalf of all similarly situated individuals employed by Advert Group to work in Arkansas since September 6, 2014. 89. Class action treatment of Plaintiff's AMWA claims is appropriate because, as alleged below, all of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23's class action requisites are satisfied. 90. The number of Arkansas Class Members is so numerous that joinder of all class members is impracticable. 91. Plaintiff is a member of the Arkansas Class, his claims are typical of the claims of other Arkansas Class Members, and he has no interests that are antagonistic to or in conflict with the interests of other class members. 92. Plaintiff and his counsel will fairly and adequately represent the Arkansas Class Members and their interests. Original Class/Collective Action Complaint Page 12 Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 13 of 15 93. Class certification is appropriate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) because common questions of law and fact predominate over questions affecting only individual class members and because a class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this litigation. 94. Accordingly, the Arkansas Class should be certified as defined in Paragraph 72. VI. RELIEF SOUGHT Plaintiff respectfully prays for judgment against Advert Group as follows: a. For an Order recognizing this proceeding as a collective action pursuant to Section 216(b) of the FLSA, certifying the FLSA Collective as defined in Paragraph 38 and requiring Advert Group to provide the names, addresses, e-mail addresses, telephone numbers, and social security. numbers of all potential collective action members; b. For an Order certifying the Arkansas Class as defined in Paragraph 72, and designating Plaintiff as Representative of the Arkansas Class; c. For an Order approving the form and content of a notice to be sent to all potential FLSA Collective Members advising them of the pendency of this litigation and of their rights with respect thereto; d. For an Order awarding Plaintiff (and those FLSA Collective Members who have joined in the suit) back wages that have been improperly withheld; e. For an Order pursuant to Section 16(b) of the FLSA finding Advert Group liable for unpaid back wages due to Plaintiff (and those FLSA Collective Members who have joined in the suit), for liquidated damages equal in amount to the unpaid compensation found due to Plaintiff (and those FLSA Collective Members who have joined in the suit); f. For an Order pursuant to the AMWA awarding Plaintiff and the Arkansas Class Members unpaid overtime and other damages allowed by law; Original Class/Collective Action Complaint Page 13 Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 14 of 15 g. For an Order awarding the costs and expenses of this action; h. For an Order awarding attorneys' fees; i. For an Order awarding pre-judgment and post-judgment interest at the highest rates allowed by law; j. For an Order awarding Plaintiff a service award as permitted by law; k. For an Order compelling the accounting of the books and records of Advert Group, at Advert Group's own expense; L For an Order providing for injunctive relief prohibiting Advert Group from engaging in future violations of the FLSA and the AMWA, and requiring Advert Group to comply with such laws going forward; and m. For an Order granting such other and further relief as may be necessary and appropriate. Date: September 6, 2017 Respectfully submitted, By: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com One Financial Center 650 S. Shackleford, Suite 411 Little Rock, Arkansas 72211 Telephone: (501) 221-0088 Facsimile: (888) 787-2040 ANDERSON2X, PLLC By: Clif Alexander (Pro Hae Vice Forlhcomin!) Tex. Bar No. 24064805 clif@a2xlaw.com 819 N. Upper Broadway Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 Telephone: (361) 452-1279 Attomeys in Charge for Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members Original ClassI Collective Action Complaint Page 14 Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 1 Filed 09/06/17 Page 15 of 15 CONSENT TO JOIN WAGE CLAIM 1. I hereby consent to participate in a collective action lawsuit against SUPERIOR PROTECTION SERVICES, INC. DBA ADVERT GROUP USA to pursue my claims of unpaid overtime during the time that I worked with the company. 2. I understand that this lawsuit is brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and consent to be bound by the Court's decision. 3. I designate the law finn and attorneys at ANDERSON2X, PLLC as my attorneys to prosecute my wage claims. 4. I intend to pursue my claim individually, unless and until the Court certifies this case as a collective action. I agree to serve as the Class Representative if the Court so approves. If someone else serves as the Class Representative, then I designate the Class Representative(s) as my agents to make decisions on my behalf concerning the litigation, the method and manner of conducting the litigation, the entering of an agreement with the Plaintiffs' counsel concerning attorneys' fees and costs, and all other matters pertaining to this lawsuit. 5. I authorize the law finn and attorneys at ANDERSON2X, PLLC to use this consent to file my claim in a separate lawsuit, class/collective action, or arbitration against the company. Signature: tiPfhllnJllli(Aug 22, 2011) D Aug 22, 2017 ate:-------------

INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER: Rule 26(f) Conference to occur by 12/15/2017; Rule 26(f) Report due by 12/29/2017; Jury Trial set for sometime during the week of 10/1/2018 at 09:00 AM in Little Rock Courtroom # 4C before Judge Kristine G. Baker. Signed at the direction of the Court on 10/16/2017.

Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 9 Filed 10/16/17 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION WILLIAM LEMONS, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated PLAINTIFF v. Case No. 4:17-cv-00567 KGB SUPERIOR PROTECTION SERVICES, INC DEFENDANT INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER Pursuant to the initial appearance entered by defendant in this case the following deadlines and proposals are in effect: 1. RULE 26(f) CONFERENCE DEADLINE: December 15, 2017 The parties are jointly responsible for holding their Rule 26(f) conference on or before the date specified. 2. RULE 26(f) REPORT DUE DATE: December 29, 2017 Consult FRCP 26(f) and Local Rule 26.1 for information to be included in the Rule 26(f) Report. The Report should be filed with the Clerk of the Court. 3. PROPOSED TRIAL DATE: October 1, 2018 The case will be scheduled for JURY Trial before United States District Judge Kristine G. Baker commencing at 9:00 a.m. sometime during the week as set for above in the Richard Sheppard Arnold United States Courthouse, Courtroom #4C, 500 West Capitol, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201. 4. RULE 16(b) CONFERENCE: (Scheduled if needed) A telephone conference will be scheduled within one week of the filing of the Rule 26(f) Report, if the parties request a conference or if the Court determines a conference is necessary, to resolve any conflicts among the parties with the proposed deadlines, proposed trial date, and other matters addressed in the Rule 26(f) Report. Attached is a proposed final scheduling order with proposed deadlines for the parties’ consideration during the Rule 26(f) conference. Unless the parties object, the proposed scheduling order will become the Court’s Final Scheduling Order and will be issued without a conference. It will be the responsibility of the plaintiff to serve a copy of the Initial Scheduling Order on any defendant who makes an appearance after the Initial Scheduling Order has been filed. Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 9 Filed 10/16/17 Page 2 of 6 It will be the responsibility of the party filing a new claim after the date of the Initial Scheduling Order to serve immediately a copy of the Initial Scheduling Order on any new defendant(s). Dated: Monday, October 16, 2017 AT THE DIRECTION OF THE COURT JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK By _/s/Tracy M. Washington _ Courtroom Deputy-2-Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 9 Filed 10/16/17 Page 3 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION WILLIAM LEMONS, Individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated PLAINTIFF v. Case No. 4:17-cv-00567 KGB SUPERIOR PROTECTION SERVICES, INC DEFENDANT PROPOSED FINAL SCHEDULING ORDER Pursuant to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. TRIAL DATE This case is scheduled for JURY trial before United States District Judge Kristine G. Baker commencing at 9:00 a.m. sometime during the week of October 1, 2018, in the Richard Sheppard Arnold United States Courthouse, Courtroom #4C, 500 West Capitol, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201. Any trial conflicts indicated by the parties in their Rule 26(f) Report will be addressed closer to this trial date, if the conflict has not been resolved. 2. ADDITION OF PARTIES/AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS Leave to add parties or amend pleadings must be sought no later than April 9, 2018. 3. DISCOVERY Discovery should be completed no later than July 18, 2018. The parties may conduct discovery beyond this date if all parties are in agreement to do so. The Court, however, will not resolve any disputes in the course of this extended discovery. All discovery requests and motions must be filed sufficiently in advance of the discovery deadline set forth in this order to allow for a timely response. Witnesses and exhibits not identified in response to appropriate discovery may not be used at trial except in extraordinary circumstances. A discovery motion must not be filed until counsel has made a good faith effort to resolve the discovery dispute, in compliance with Local Rule 7.2. When a discovery motion is filed, a response should be filed promptly. A conference call will be scheduled to resolve such matters, if the Court deems it necessary. Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 9 Filed 10/16/17 Page 4 of 6 4. EXPERT DISCLOSURES AND REPORTS Case-in-chief expert disclosures, including reports, must be made by May 4, 2018. Rebuttal expert disclosures, including reports, must be made by June 4, 2018. These disclosures must be in writing, signed, and served. They are not filed in the Clerk’s Office. 5. STATUS REPORT A status report must be filed with the Clerk’s office on or before August 2, 2018. The report must include the date and results of any settlement conference, the settlement prospects, and an estimate of the length of trial. 6. MOTION DEADLINE All motions, except motions for class certification and motions in limine, must be filed on or before August 2, 2018. Motions for summary judgment must comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules 7.2 and 56.1. Motions filed pursuant to Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), must be filed on or before August 2, 2018. They shall not be filed as a motion in limine. Pursuant to Local Rule 26.1, motions for class certification must be filed 90 days after the Rule 26(f) conference; therefore, any motions for class certification are due on or before March 15, 2018. Motions in limine must be filed on or before September 17, 2018 and responses must be filed seven (7) days thereafter. Motions submitted after the deadline may be denied solely on that ground. Local Rule 7.2(b) requires that, within fourteen (14) days from the date copies of a motion and supporting papers have been served, any party opposing a motion shall serve and file with the Clerk a concise statement in opposition to the motion with supporting authorities. Any reply to a response to a motion must be filed within seven (7) days of service of the response. The Court may or may not wait on the filing of a reply before ruling on the motion. 7. SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE REQUEST All requests for a settlement conference must be made on or before August 17, 2018. 8. PRETRIAL DISCLOSURE SHEET Pretrial disclosure sheets must be filed simultaneously by the parties according to the outline contained in Local Rule 26.2 no later than September 10, 2018. That witnesses and exhibits must-2-Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 9 Filed 10/16/17 Page 5 of 6 be listed on the pretrial information sheet does not relieve a party of the obligation to provide the names of witnesses and exhibits in response to discovery requests. Objections to opposing parties’ pretrial disclosure sheets will be due on September 17, 2018. 9. TRIAL BRIEF All trial briefs must be filed no later than September 10, 2018. Responding trial briefs must be filed no later than September 17, 2018. 10. DEPOSITIONS TO BE USED AT TRIAL OTHER THAN FOR IMPEACHMENT The proffering party must designate the pertinent portions of a deposition to be used as evidence at trial by September 10, 2018. Counter-designations must be made by September 17, 2018. These designations need not be filed with the Court but should be exchanged by the parties. Objections to any deposition or videotapes that will be used at trial must be made by written motion indicating the specific objection and its legal basis by September 21, 2018, with the response due September 26, 2018. Depositions to be read at trial must be marked as exhibits. 11. JURY INSTRUCTIONS AND STATEMENT OF CASE OR PROPOSED FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS For jury trials, the parties must confer regarding the proposed instructions and a verdict form in an attempt to narrow areas of disagreement. The parties must submit an agreed set of instructions on specific issues in the case to the Court on or before September 24, 2018. Standard instructions from AMI, Eighth Circuit, or Federal Jury Practice Instructions (5th Edition), as applicable, should be used whenever possible, and the source of authority for the instruction should be noted at the end of each instruction. A party requesting an instruction that cannot be agreed upon must submit that instruction to the Court and opposing counsel, setting out the disagreement. Note the source of authority on the bottom of each proposed instruction. Instructions must be electronically submitted in Word or WordPerfect format to kgbchambers@ared.uscourts.gov. Each party must submit to the Court on or before September 24, 2018 a concise statement of the case, no more than one page in length, that it proposes would be proper to read to the panel of venire persons during voir dire and also any proposed voir dire questions it wishes the Court to pose to the panel. 12. STIPULATIONS The parties should stipulate in writing to the facts not in controversy on or before September 24, 2018.-3-Case 4:17-cv-00567-KGB Document 9 Filed 10/16/17 Page 6 of 6 13. INTRODUCTION OF EXHIBITS Exhibits must be made available to all parties and reviewed by counsel prior to the trial date. Each party will provide to the Court three (3) copies of all exhibits, and each exhibit will be numbered for identification purposes. All exhibits must be listed in numerical sequence on the form available through the Court’s website (See Court Forms-Civil Forms AO-187 Exhibit and Witness List). The lists must be submitted to the Courtroom Deputy thirty (30) minutes before the beginning of trial, with notations made on the Court’s copy of the list noting exhibits to which there is an objection. The Court will receive all stipulated exhibits at the beginning of the trial. If you anticipate using electronic equipment during trial, you must notify the Courtroom Deputy prior to your trial date. If you wish to bring electronic devices to the courthouse for any proceeding, please note Amended General Order No. 54 14. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Counsel must promptly check the Court’s list of financial interests on file in the U.S. District Court Clerk’s Office to determine whether there is any conflict that might require recusal. If any party is a subsidiary or affiliate of any company in which the Court has a financial interest, bring that fact to the Court’s attention immediately. Please communicate with Tracy Washington at 501-604-5424 or tracy_washington@ared.uscourts.gov to ascertain your position on the calendar as the trial date approaches. In the event of settlement, advise Ms. Washington immediately. The case will not be removed from the trial docket until an order of dismissal has been entered. Dated: Monday, October 16, 2017 AT THE DIRECTION OF THE COURT JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK By:/s/Tracy M. Washington_ Courtroom Deputy-4-

Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Rule 26(f) Report by Superior Protection Services Inc (Cross, J.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION WILLIAM LEMONS, PLAINTIFF Individually and On Behalf Of All Other Similarly Situated v. CASE NO. 4:17-CV-00567-KGB SUPERIOR PROTECTION SERVICES, INC. DEFENDANT D/B/A ADVERT GROUP USA JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RULE 26(f) REPORT Comes now Plaintiff, William Lemons, and Defendant Superior Protection Services, Inc. D/B/A Advert Group USA (collectively, the Parties), by and through their undersigned counsel, jointly submit this Motion for Extension of Time to File Rule 26(f) Report, as follows: 1. Pursuant to the Court's Initial Scheduling Order in this matter, the parties are to jointly submit a Rule 26(f) Report by December 29, 2017. See Doc. 9. 2. Undersigned counsel have engaged in multiple discussions as to the scope of this litigation and have exchanged documentation in a joint effort to resolve initial questions. The Parties seek to provide an accurate report to the Court, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) as to the issues that may need to be addressed, yet the Parties respectfully seek additional time to seek mutual resolution. 3. Accordingly, the Parties respectfully request a two-week extension of time up to and including January 12, 2018, in which to jointly submit a Rule 26(f) Report for the Court's review. 4. This Motion is made in in good faith and not for undue delay or any improper purpose. 1 233311 WHEREFORE, for good cause shown, the Parties respectfully request an extension of time of up to and including January 12, 2018, in which to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint. Respectfully submitted, By: /s/ J. Bruce Cross J. Bruce Cross, Ark Bar No. 74028 Gregory J. Northen, Ark Bar No. 2011181 CROSS, GUNTER, WITHERSPOON & GALCHUS, P.C. 500 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501) 371-9999 – Telephone (501) 371-0035 – Facsimile Email: bcross@cgwg.com Email: gnorthen@cgwg.com ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 29th day of December, 2017, I electronically filed the foregoing pleading with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which shall send notification of such filing to the following: Mr. Joshua Sanford SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC One Financial Center 650 South Shackleford, Suite 41 Little Rock, AR 72211 Email: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com And Mr. Clif Alexander ANDERSON2X, PLLC 819 N. Upper Broadway Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Email: clif@a2xlaw.com /s/ J. Bruce Cross J. Bruce Cross 2 233311

ORDER granting {{11}} Joint Motion for Extension of Time to File Rule 26(f) Report. The parties have up to and including 1/12/2018 to file the Rule 26(f) report. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 1/5/2018.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION WILLIAM LEMONS, Individually and On Behalf Of All Others Similarly Situated PLAINTIFF v. Case No. 4:17-cv-00567-KGB SUPERIOR PROTECTION SERVICES, INC. d/b/a ADVERT GROUP USA DEFENDANT ORDER Before the Court is the joint motion for extension of time to file a Rule 26(f) report filed by plaintiff William Lemons and defendant Superior Protection Services, Inc. d/b/a Advert Group USA (Dkt. No. 11). The parties filed their joint motion on December 29, 2017, requesting up to and including January 12, 2018, to file the report. For good cause shown, the joint motion is granted (Dkt. No. 11). The parties have up to and including January 12, 2018, to file the Rule 26(f) report. So ordered this the 5th day of January, 2018. ______________________________ Kristine G. Baker United States District Judge

REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting by Superior Protection Services Inc.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS LITTLE ROCK DIVISION § WILLIAM LEMONS, § Individually and on behalf § Civil Action No. 4:17-cv-567-KGB of all others similarly situated, § § Plaintiff, § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED § v. § COLLECTIVE ACTION § PURSUANT TO 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) SUPERIOR PROTECTION SERVICES, INC. § D/B/A ADVERT GROUP USA § CLASS ACTION PURSUANT TO § FED. R. CIV. P. 23 Defendant. § JOINT RULE 26(f) REPORT Plaintiff William Lemons ("Plaintiff" or "Plaintiff Lemons"), individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, and Defendant Superior Protection Services, Inc. d/b/a Advert Group USA (collectively "the Parties") hereby file their Joint Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) Report. (1) Any changes in timing, form, or requirements of mandatory disclosures under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a). The Parties do not request any changes in the timing, form, or requirements of mandatory disclosures under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a). (2) Date when mandatory disclosures were or will be made. Both Parties will serve their initial disclosures on or before January 26, 2018. (3) Subjects on which discovery may be needed. The Parties intend to conduct discovery on Plaintiff's alleged claims made pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §§ 207, et seq. and Defendant's alleged affirmative defenses. (4) Whether any party will likely be requested to disclose or produce information from electronic or computer-based media. If so: Plaintiff intends to request Defendant's payroll and time keeping information for Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members. Plaintiff further intends to request the contact information for the Putative Class Members (including their name, address, telephone number, email address, and the last four numbers of their social security number) be produced in electronic format. (a) whether disclosure or production will be limited to data reasonably available to the parties in the ordinary course of business. The information sought by Plaintiff to be produced in electronic format is limited to data reasonably available to the parties in the ordinary course of business. (b) the anticipated scope, cost, and time required for disclosure of production of data beyond what is reasonably available to the parties in the ordinary course of business; Not applicable. (c) the format and media agreed to by the parties for the production of such data as well as agreed procedures for such production; To the extent available, Plaintiff requests that Defendant produce its records in Excel form. Defendant may produce some data in its native form, but will attempt to produce information in Excel form to the extent possible. (d) whether reasonable measures have been taken to preserve potentially discoverable data from alteration or destruction in the ordinary course of business or otherwise; Defendant has issued a preservation notice to preserve any and all documents related to the claims and defenses in this lawsuit, if any; (e) other problems which the parties anticipate may arise in connection with electronic or computer based discovery. The Parties do not anticipate other problems to arise in connection with electronic or computer based discovery. (5) Date by which discovery should be completed. Plaintiff has filed this lawsuit as a collective action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 216(b) and intends to file his motion for conditional certification, if at all, by March 5, 2018. Because the time necessary for discovery will vary greatly depending on whether a class is sought to be conditionally certified, and if so, the size of the collective, the Parties request that this Court hold a subsequent status conference to set discovery and other related deadlines after the close of the opt-in period, if any. (6) Any needed changes in the limitations imposed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Parties do not propose any changes to the limitations imposed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (7) Any orders, e.g. protective orders, which should be entered. The Parties will confer to jointly file a motion for any protective order(s) necessary in this matter. (8) Any objections to initial disclosures on the ground that mandatory disclosures are not appropriate in the circumstances of the action. None. (9) Any objections to the proposed trial date. Plaintiff has filed this lawsuit as a collective action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 216(b) and intends to file his motion for conditional certification, if at all, by March 5, 2018. Because the time necessary for discovery, as well as the length of time necessary to try the case, will vary greatly depending on whether a class is sought to be conditionally certified, and if so, the size of the collective, the Parties request that this Court hold a subsequent status conference to set discovery and other related deadlines after the close of the opt-in period, if any. (10) Proposed deadline for joining other parties and amending the pleadings. Plaintiff has filed this lawsuit as a collective action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 216(b) and intends to file his motion for conditional certification, if at all, by March 5, 2018. Because the joinder deadline will be affected by this Court's decision regarding conditional certification, the Parties request that this Court hold a subsequent status conference to set discovery and other related deadlines after the close of the opt-in period, if any. The Parties agree to an amendment deadline of March 5, 2018. (11) Proposed deadline for completing discovery. Plaintiff has filed this lawsuit as a collective action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 216(b) and intends to file his motion for conditional certification, if at all, by March 5, 2018. Because the time necessary for discovery will vary greatly depending on whether a class is sought to be conditionally certified, and if so, the size of the collective, the Parties request that this Court hold a subsequent status conference to set discovery and other related deadlines after the close of the opt-in period, if any. (12) Proposed deadline for filing motions other than motions for class certification. The Parties agree to a motion deadline of January 12, 2019. (13) Class Certification: In the case of a class action complaint, the proposed deadline for the parties to file a motion for class certification. March 5, 2018. Date: January 15, 2018 Respectfully submitted, ANDERSON2X, PLLC /s/ Clif Alexander Clif Alexander (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) Texas Bar No. 24064805 clif@a2xlaw.com 819 N. Upper Broadway Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 Telephone: (361) 452-1279 Facsimile: (361) 452-1284 SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC /s/ Josh Sanford Josh Sanford Ark. Bar No. 2001037 josh@sanfordlawfirm.com One Financial Center 650 S. Shackleford, Suite 411 Little Rock, Arkansas 72211 Telephone: (501) 221-0088 Facsimile: (888) 787-2040 Attorneys in Charge for Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members CROSS, GUNTER, WITHERSPOON & GALCHUS, P.C. /s/ J. Bruce Cross J. Bruce Cross Ar. Bar No. 74028 Gregory J. Northen Ar. Bar No. 2011181 Cross, Gunter, Witherspoon & Galchus, P.C. bcross@cgwg.com gnorthen@cgwg.com 500 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 200 Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Telephone: (501) 371-9999 Facsimile: (501) 371-0035 Attorneys for Defendant

FINAL SCHEDULING ORDER: Jury Trial set for sometime during the week of 10/1/2018 at 09:00 AM in Little Rock Courtroom # 4C before Judge Kristine G. Baker. Discovery due by 7/18/2018; Motions due by 8/2/2018; Pretrial Disclosure Sheet due by 9/10/2018; Status Report due by 8/2/2018. Signed at the direction of the Court on 03/07/2018.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION WILLIAM LEMONS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated PLAINTIFF v. Case No. 4:17-cv-00567 KGB SUPERIOR PROTECTION SERVICES, INC. DEFENDANT FINAL SCHEDULING ORDER Pursuant to Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. TRIAL DATE This case is scheduled for JURY trial before United States District Judge Kristine G. Baker commencing at 9:00 a.m. sometime during the week of October 1, 2018, in the Richard Sheppard Arnold United States Courthouse, Courtroom #4C, 500 West Capitol, Little Rock, Arkansas 72201. Any trial conflicts indicated by the parties in their Rule 26(f) Report will be addressed closer to this trial date, if the conflict has not been resolved. 2. ADDITION OF PARTIES/AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS Leave to add parties or amend pleadings must be sought no later than April 9, 2018. 3. DISCOVERY Discovery should be completed no later than July 18, 2018. The parties may conduct discovery beyond this date if all parties are in agreement to do so. The Court, however, will not resolve any disputes in the course of this extended discovery. All discovery requests and motions must be filed sufficiently in advance of the discovery deadline set forth in this order to allow for a timely response. Witnesses and exhibits not identified in response to appropriate discovery may not be used at trial except in extraordinary circumstances. A discovery motion must not be filed until counsel has made a good faith effort to resolve the discovery dispute, in compliance with Local Rule 7.2. When a discovery motion is filed, a response should be filed promptly. A conference call will be scheduled to resolve such matters, if the Court deems it necessary. 4. EXPERT DISCLOSURES AND REPORTS Case-in-chief expert disclosures, including reports, must be made by May 4, 2018. Rebuttal expert disclosures, including reports, must be made by June 4, 2018. These disclosures must be in writing, signed, and served. They are not filed in the Clerk's Office. 5. STATUS REPORT A status report must be filed with the Clerk's office on or before August 2, 2018. The report must include the date and results of any settlement conference, the settlement prospects, and an estimate of the length of trial. 6. MOTION DEADLINE All motions, except motions for class certification and motions in limine, must be filed on or before August 2, 2018. Motions for summary judgment must comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules 7.2 and 56.1. Motions filed pursuant to Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993), must be filed on or before August 2, 2018. They shall not be filed as a motion in limine. Pursuant to Local Rule 26.1, motions for class certification must be filed 90 days after the Rule 26(f) conference; therefore, any motions for class certification are due on or before March 15, 2018. Motions in limine must be filed on or before September 17, 2018 and responses must be filed seven (7) days thereafter. Motions submitted after the deadline may be denied solely on that ground. Local Rule 7.2(b) requires that, within fourteen (14) days from the date copies of a motion and supporting papers have been served, any party opposing a motion shall serve and file with the Clerk a concise statement in opposition to the motion with supporting authorities. Any reply to a response to a motion must be filed within seven (7) days of service of the response. The Court may or may not wait on the filing of a reply before ruling on the motion. 7. SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE REQUEST All requests for a settlement conference must be made on or before August 17, 2018. 8. PRETRIAL DISCLOSURE SHEET Pretrial disclosure sheets must be filed simultaneously by the parties according to the outline contained in Local Rule 26.2 no later than September 10, 2018. That witnesses and exhibits must -2- be listed on the pretrial information sheet does not relieve a party of the obligation to provide the names of witnesses and exhibits in response to discovery requests. Objections to opposing parties' pretrial disclosure sheets will be due on September 17, 2018. 9. TRIAL BRIEF All trial briefs must be filed no later than September 10, 2018. Responding trial briefs must be filed no later than September 17, 2018. 10. DEPOSITIONS TO BE USED AT TRIAL OTHER THAN FOR IMPEACHMENT The proffering party must designate the pertinent portions of a deposition to be used as evidence at trial by September 10, 2018. Counter-designations must be made by September 17, 2018. These designations need not be filed with the Court but should be exchanged by the parties. Objections to any deposition or videotapes that will be used at trial must be made by written motion indicating the specific objection and its legal basis by September 21, 2018, with the response due September 26, 2018. Depositions to be read at trial must be marked as exhibits. 11. JURY INSTRUCTIONS AND STATEMENT OF CASE OR PROPOSED FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS For jury trials, the parties must confer regarding the proposed instructions and a verdict form in an attempt to narrow areas of disagreement. The parties must submit an agreed set of instructions on specific issues in the case to the Court on or before September 24, 2018. Standard instructions from AMI, Eighth Circuit, or Federal Jury Practice Instructions (5th Edition), as applicable, should be used whenever possible, and the source of authority for the instruction should be noted at the end of each instruction. A party requesting an instruction that cannot be agreed upon must submit that instruction to the Court and opposing counsel, setting out the disagreement. Note the source of authority on the bottom of each proposed instruction. Instructions must be electronically submitted in Word or WordPerfect format to kgbchambers@ared.uscourts.gov. Each party must submit to the Court on or before September 24, 2018 a concise statement of the case, no more than one page in length, that it proposes would be proper to read to the panel of venire persons during voir dire and also any proposed voir dire questions it wishes the Court to pose to the panel. 12. STIPULATIONS The parties should stipulate in writing to the facts not in controversy on or before September 24, 2018. -3- 13. INTRODUCTION OF EXHIBITS Exhibits must be made available to all parties and reviewed by counsel prior to the trial date. Each party will provide to the Court three (3) copies of all exhibits, and each exhibit will be numbered for identification purposes. All exhibits must be listed in numerical sequence on the form available through the Court's website (See Court Forms - Civil Forms AO-187 Exhibit and Witness List). The lists must be submitted to the Courtroom Deputy thirty (30) minutes before the beginning of trial, with notations made on the Court's copy of the list noting exhibits to which there is an objection. The Court will receive all stipulated exhibits at the beginning of the trial. If you anticipate using electronic equipment during trial, you must notify the Courtroom Deputy prior to your trial date. If you wish to bring electronic devices to the courthouse for any proceeding, please note Amended General Order No. 54. 14. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Counsel must promptly check the Court's list of financial interests on file in the U.S. District Court Clerk's Office to determine whether there is any conflict that might require recusal. If any party is a subsidiary or affiliate of any company in which the Court has a financial interest, bring that fact to the Court's attention immediately. Please communicate with Tracy Washington at 501-604-5424 or tracy_washington@ared.uscourts.gov to ascertain your position on the calendar as the trial date approaches. In the event of settlement, advise Ms. Washington immediately. The case will not be removed from the trial docket until an order of dismissal has been entered. Dated: Wednesday, March 07, 2018 AT THE DIRECTION OF THE COURT JAMES W. McCORMACK, CLERK By: /s/ Tracy M. Washington_ Courtroom Deputy -4-

Interested in this case?

Sign up to receive real-time updates
Last full docket sheet refresh: 404 days ago. Refresh now
#
Datesort arrow up
Description
1
09/06/2017
ORIGINAL CLASS/COLLECTIVE ACTION COMPLAINT against Superior Protection Services Inc filed by William Lemons. (Fee $400. Receipt Number LIT063536.) Summons issued and returned to counsel for service.
1
Civil Cover Sheet)(mef
1 Attachment
2
09/12/2017
MOTION for Leave to Appear pro hac vice by William Clifton "Clif" Alexander. Fee $100 receipt number 0860-3116540. Filed by William Lemons
3
09/18/2017
SUMMONS Returned Executed by William Lemons. Superior Protection Services Inc served on 9/14/2017.
4
09/26/2017
NOTICE of Appearance by J. Bruce Cross on behalf of Superior Protection Services Inc (Cross, J.)
5
09/26/2017
Unopposed MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 1 Complaint, by Superior Protection Services Inc (Cross, J.)
6
09/26/2017
ORDER granting 5 Superior's unopposed motion for extension of time to respond to plaintiff's complaint. Superior has up to and including 10/9/2017, in which to file its response to Mr. Lemon's complaint. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 9/26/2017.
7
09/27/2017
NOTICE of Appearance by J. Bruce Cross on behalf of Superior Protection Services Inc (Cross, J.)
8
10/09/2017
ANSWER to 1 Complaint, with Jury Demand by Superior Protection Services Inc.(Cross, J.)
9
10/16/2017
INITIAL SCHEDULING ORDER: Rule 26(f) Conference to occur by 12/15/2017; Rule 26(f) Report due by 12/29/2017; Jury Trial set for sometime during the week of 10/1/2018 at 09:00 AM in Little Rock Courtroom # 4C before Judge Kristine G. Baker. Signed at the direction of the Court on 10/16/2017.
10
10/19/2017
ORDER granting 2 William Clifton "Clif" Alexander's motion for admission pro hac vice. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 10/19/2017.
11
12/29/2017
Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Rule 26(f) Report by Superior Protection Services Inc (Cross, J.)
12
01/05/2018
ORDER granting 11 Joint Motion for Extension of Time to File Rule 26(f) Report. The parties have up to and including 1/12/2018 to file the Rule 26(f) report. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 1/5/2018.
13
01/15/2018
REPORT of Rule 26(f) Planning Meeting by Superior Protection Services Inc.
14
03/07/2018
FINAL SCHEDULING ORDER: Jury Trial set for sometime during the week of 10/1/2018 at 09:00 AM in Little Rock Courtroom # 4C before Judge Kristine G. Baker. Discovery due by 7/18/2018; Motions due by 8/2/2018; Pretrial Disclosure Sheet due by 9/10/2018; Status Report due by 8/2/2018. Signed at the direction of the Court on 03/07/2018.
15
09/25/2018
Joint MOTION to Dismiss with Prejudice and for Approval of Settlement Agreement by Superior Protection Services Inc
1
Exhibit
2
Exhibit
2 Attachments
16
09/27/2018
ORDER granting [15] joint motion to dismiss with prejudice and for approval of settlement agreement; dismissing with prejudice this action and without costs to any party, except to the extent otherwise expressly provided in the agreement; and retaining exclusive jurisdiction over the performance and enforcement of the settlement agreement and this Order. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 9/27/2018.
Would you like this case removed from DocketBird? Request removal.