Batiz

Batiz v. American Commercial Security Services

Good Law
776 F. Supp. 2d 1087·2011 WL 1513778·2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24108
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMarch 9, 2011Case EDCV 06-00566-VAP (OPx)California5,723 words

Opinion

Opinion

Phillips, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN PART

Before the Court is a “Motion for Summary Judgment of the Claims of Plaintiff Gordon Narayan and Partial Summary Judgment as to Relevant Dates Worked by Plaintiff Nicole Nabinett” (“Motion”) filed by Defendants American Continental Security Services, ABM Industries, Inc., ABM Security Services, and Security Services of America (collectively, “Defendants”). After consideration of the papers in support of, and opposition to, the Motion, and arguments advanced at the March 7, 2011, hearing, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ Motion in part.

I.BACKGROUND

A. Procedural History

The parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this action, and the Court need not repeat it here, with limited exception. On January 17, 2008, Plaintiffs filed their Fourth Amended Complaint (“FAC”), identifying Nicole Nabinett (“Nabinett”) and Gordon Narayan (“Narayan”) as named Plaintiffs. (See Doc. No. 108 (Fourth Am. Compl.) at ¶¶ 27, 30.) On January 17, 2008, the Court also conditionally certified a nationwide class consisting of “[a]ll current or former nonexempt employees of [Defendants], who ... worked more than forty hours…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.