Bell v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SANDY BELL, MARTIN GAMA, and No. 2:12-cv-02499-JAM-CKD MICHAEL GAMA, individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated, and as aggrieved employees pursuant ORDER DENYING to the Private Attorneys DEFENDANTS’SUCCESSIVE MOTION FOR General Act (“PAGA”), SUMMARY JUDGMENT Plaintiffs, v. HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC., a Delaware corporation; JOHN BROOKS, an individual; and DOES 1-10 inclusive, 19 Defendants. 20 Sandy Bell, Martin Gama, and Michael Henry (“Plaintiffs”) allege Defendants—Home Depot, U.S.A. and John Brooks, the regional manager for the Home Depot stores where Plaintiffs worked—violated California law by designing Home Depot’s workday to evade overtime obligations. Since this case began, Defendants have filed four motions for summary judgment. Plaintiffs argue the Court should not adjudicate Defendants’ most-recent motion because it raises arguments that either have already been adjudicated or are legally baseless. The Court 2 …