Ortiz-Alvarado et al v. Gomez et al
| Juan Carlos Mena, Noel Salomon Mena and Vinicio Ortiz-Alvarado |
| El Potrillo, LLC, Marcos Gomez, Jeovani Gomez, El Toro, Inc., XYZ Corp. and ABC, LLC |
| 0:2014cv00209 |
| January 22, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| DMN Office |
| Hennepin |
| Michael J. Davis |
| Steven E. Rau |
| Fair Labor Standards Act |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
69
MEMORANDUM OF LAW & ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. Plaintiffs' Motion for Conditional Class Certification, Court Authorized Notice, and Tolling of Statute of Limitations 31 is GRANTED. 2. Defendants' Motion to Supplement the Re cord 58 is GRANTED. 3. The Court appoints Special Master Arthur J. Boylan to work with the parties to craft a stipulated proposed Notice for Court approval and to address the unresolved issues related to the scope of the class, the method of not ice, and the specific contents of the Notice. If the parties are unable to agree on these issues, Special Master Boylan shall issue a Report and Recommendation regarding the scope of the class, the method of notice, and the specific contents of the Notice. Special Master Boylan shall be compensated at a rate of $500 per hour. The parties shall split the cost of Special Master Boylan's fees. (Written Opinion). Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Davis on 8/12/14. (GRR)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
