Guzman v. Cascade Process Controls, Inc.

Western District of Texas, txwd-5:2019-cv-00162

Rule 26(f) Discovery Report/Case Management Plan by Daniel Guzman.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION DANIEL GUZMAN § § Plaintiff, § § Civil Action No. 5:19-cv-162-FB (HJB) v. § § CASCADE PROCESS CONTROLS, INC. § JURY DEMANDED § Defendant § JOINT FED. R. CIV. P. 26 REPORT 1) Are there any outstanding jurisdictional issues? For removed cases based on diversity jurisdiction, do the parties agree that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 at the time of removal? If not, each party should state its position on the amount in controversy. There are no outstanding jurisdictional issues. 2) Are there any unserved parties? If more than 90 days have passed since the filing of the Complaint or petition, should these unserved parties be dismissed? There are no unserved parties. 3) What are the causes of action, defenses, and counterclaims in this case? What are the elements of the cause(s) of action, defenses, and counterclaims pled? Plaintiffs allege violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. ("FLSA") in that they were employed by Defendant as nonexempt employees and not paid one and one-half times their regular hourly rate for all hours worked over forty an a workweek during the statutory period. Plaintiffs further allege that Defendant's violations were committed willfully, and that Defendant's conduct was not based in good faith and with a reasonable belief that they complied with the FLSA. Plaintiffs further allege there exists a class of similarly situated individuals who would opt into this case following conditional certification and notice. 1 Defendant contends that it has not violated the FLSA, and that if any such violations did occur those violations were accidental and by no means based upon alleged willful or knowing misconduct of the Defendant. 4) Are there any agreements or stipulations that can be made about any facts in this case or any element in the cause(s) of action? a) Defendant is an employer under the FLSA and Plaintiffs and the Putative Class Members are/were Defendant's employees. b) FLSA enterprise and individual coverage applies in this case. 5) State the parties' views and proposals on all items identified in Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f)(3). A. What changes should be made in the timing, form or requirement for disclosures under Rule 26(a), including a statement of when initial disclosures were made or will be made. No changes should be made to the form or requirement for disclosures under Rule 26(a). The parties will serve the respective disclosures within thirty (30) days of the filing of this Joint Discovery Plan. B. The subjects on which discovery may be needed, when discovery should be completed, and whether discovery should be conducted in phases or limited to or focused on particular issues. Discovery will relate to Plaintiffs and the Putative Class Members' claims for unpaid overtime compensation including, but not limited to information and documentation regarding Plaintiffs and the Putative Class Members' job duties while employed with Defendant; Plaintiffs and the Putative Class Members' payroll records; Plaintiffs and the Putative Class Members' employment files; Plaintiffs and the Putative Class Members' hours of work; Plaintiffs and the Putative Class Members' claims for damages; and the identity of all similarly situated employees and former employees (Putative Class Members). Discovery is anticipated to be completed within eight (8) months of the filing of this Joint Discovery Plan. There is no need for discovery to be conducted in phases or limited to or focused to particular issues at this time. C. Any issues about disclosure, discovery, or preservation of electronically stored 2 information including the form or forms in which it should be produced. The parties have no issues at this time. D. Any issues about claims of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation materials including—if the parties agree on a procedure to assert these claims after production— whether to ask the court to include their agreement in an order under Federal Rule of Evidence 502. No issues at this time regarding claims of privilege or of protection as trial-preparation materials. E. What changes should be made in the limitation on discovery imposed under these rules or by local rule, and what other limitations should be imposed. No changes or limitations to discovery should be imposed at this time. F. Any other orders that the court should issue under Rule 26(c) or under Rule 16(b) and (c). None at this time. 6) What, if any, discovery has been completed? What discovery remains to be done? Have the parties considered conducting discovery in phases? There has been no discovery conducted as of the filing of this Rule 26 Report. The parties anticipate conducting written discovery including interrogatories, requests for production of documents and things, requests for admission, and oral depositions. There is no need to conduct discovery in phases. 7) What, if any, discovery disputes exist? Not applicable at this time. 8) Have the parties discussed the desirability of filing a proposed order pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 502? The parties anticipate they will be able to agree on any such order should the need arise. 3 9) Have the parties discussed mediation? The parties believe mediation may be appropriate after discovery has been conducted, but the parties want to try informal discussions first. Dated: May 20, 2019. Respectfully submitted, ANDERSON ALEXANDER, PLLC By: /s/ Clif Alexander Clif Alexander Texas Bar No. 24064805 clif@a2xlaw.com Lauren E. Braddy Texas Bar No. 24071993 lauren@a2xlaw.com Alan Clifton Gordon Texas Bar No. 00793838 cgordon@a2xlaw.com Carter T. Hastings Texas Bar No. 24101879 carter@a2xlaw.com 819 N. Upper Broadway Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 Telephone: (361) 452-1279 Facsimile: (361) 452-1284 LEICHTER LAW FIRM, PC By: /s/ David G. Langenfeld David G. Langenfeld Texas Bar No. 11911325 david@leichterlaw.com 1602 East 7th Street Austin, Texas 78702 Telephone: (512) 495-9995 Facsimile: (512) 482-0164 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Putative Class Members 4 /s/ Charles A. Moster, Esq. Charles A. Moster, Esq. State Bar No. 00797782 THE MOSTER LAW FIRM, P.C. 4920 South Loop 289, Suite 101 Lubbock, TX 79414 cmoster@themosterlawfirm.com Phone: (806) 778-6486 Facsimile: (806) 302-7046 Counsel for Defendants /s/ B. Blaze Taylor, Esq. B. Blaze Taylor, Esq. State Bar No. 24106495 THE MOSTER LAW FIRM, P.C. 4920 South Loop 289, Suite 101 Lubbock, TX 79414 btaylor@themosterlawfirm.com Phone: (806) 778-6486 Facsimile: (866) 302-7046 Counsel for Defendants 5