Jasmine Brown v. BQ Operations Holding, LLC

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff argues that Defendants have not sufficiently shown that the amount in controversy exceeds the $5 million jurisdictional threshold for CAFA.

Defendants assert that the amount in controversy is $7,631,063.62. See Not. of Removal at ¶ 39. This figure is comprised of the following items: (1) $1,941,979.25 for meal period violations, (2) $1,941,979.25 for rest period violations, (3) $1,759,142.40 for waiting time penalties, (4) $461,750 for inaccurate wage statements, and (5) $1,526,212.72 in attorneys’ fees. See id. at ¶¶ 45, 51, 58, 64, 67; Opp. at 17 n.4 (updating calculations). Item (1) is predicated on the assertion that each member of the putative class suffered two meal period violations per workweek, whereas item (2) depends upon Defendants’ assumption that each proposed class member suffered two rest period violations per workweek. See Not. of Removal at ¶¶ 45, 51. Further, Defendants assert that item (5) is a reasonable estimation of Plaintiff’s recoverable attorneys’ fees because “[t]he attorneys’ fees benchmark in the Ninth Circuit is 25 percent.” Id. at ¶ 66.

The Complaint does not specify the frequency of the alleged…