Leonard

Leonard v. FedEx Freight, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 19, 20222:19-cv-00042California1,003 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SEAN LEONARD, MEL MENDIETA, No. 2:19-cv-00042-MCE-KJN on behalf of themselves, and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, ORDER v. FEDEX FREIGHT, INC. and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, 16 Defendants. 17 By way of this action, Plaintiffs Sean Leonard and Mel Mendieta (collectively “Plaintiffs”) seek to recover from Defendant FedEx Freight, Inc. (“Defendant”) for violations of California’s wage and hour laws and for retaliation. Presently before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Renew Second Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings (“Renewed Motion”) (ECF No. 56), which seeks to dismiss Plaintiffs’ union- retaliation claims on the basis that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over those causes of action because they are preempted by the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Labor Relations Board (“NLRB”). See San Diego Unions v. Garmon, 359 U.S. 236, 245, 79 S. Ct. 773, 3 L. Ed. 2d 775 (1959). Defendant’s original Motion for 27 1 Although the…

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.