Steven Gonzalez v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz L.P.

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJanuary 20, 20228:21-cv-01611California2,492 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

This is an employment class action brought by Plaintiff Steven Gonzalez (“Gonzalez”) against Defendants H&M Hennes and Mauritz L.P., Alyse Digildo, and Does 1 through 100 (collectively “H&M”). (Ex. B to Notice of Removal (“NOR”), Compl., Doc. 1-1, ¶¶ 3-5.) Gonzalez seeks to represent a class of “all current and former non-exempt employees of H&M within the State of California at any time commencing four (4) years preceding the filing of Plaintiff’s complaint up until the time that notice of the class action is provided to the class[.]” (Compl. ¶ 24.) Gonzalez asserts nine claims against H&M: (1) failure to pay overtime wages; (2) failure to pay minimum wages; (3) failure to provide meal periods; (4) failure to provide rest periods; (5) waiting time penalties; (6) wage statement violations; (7) failure to ______________________________________________________________________________

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case 8:21-cv-01611-JLS-JDE Document Filed 01/20/ Page 2 of Page ID #:307

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No.: 8:21-cv-01611-JLS-JDE …

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.