Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
December 14, 2017, Decided; December 14, 2017, Filed
Civil Action No. 3:16-cv-40138-MGM
REPORT & RECOMMENDATION REGARDING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS, PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATION, AND PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR EQUITABLE TOLLING (Dkt. Nos. 22, 34, 45, 47, 49 & 62)
This is a putative collective and class action for backpay and liquidated damages. The plaintiffs, former employees of defendant Sonam's Stonewalls & Art, LLC, d/b/a Sonam's Stonewalls & Art ("Sonam's"), allege that Sonam's and its owner-operator, defendant Sonam Rinchen Lama ("Lama") [*2] (collectively, "Defendants"), knowingly and willfully failed to pay them for all of the hours they worked and failed to pay them overtime wages for the hours they worked in excess of forty hours per week. The original complaint brought by plaintiff Jampa Gonpo ("Gonpo") asserts claims under federal law for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq., and the Internal Revenue Code ("IRC"), 26 U.S.C. § 7434, as well as under the Massachusetts Wage Act, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, §§ 148 et seq., and the Massachusetts Minimum Fair Wage Law, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 151, §§ 1 et. seq. (Dkt. No. 1). In a first amended complaint filed without leave of court, Gonpo and opt-in plaintiffs Jamyang Gyatso Phulotsang ("Phulotsang"), NFN Tobden ("Tobden"), and Tulku Dechen ("Dechen") (collectively, "Plaintiffs") reassert the same claims as those stated in the original complaint and add a number of state common law claims.
Presently before the court are: (1) Plaintiff's Motion for Conditional Certification and for Court Facilitation of Notice Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) (Dkt. No. 22); (2) Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) (directed at the original complaint) (Dkt. No. 34); (3) Defendants' Motion to Dismiss: Rule 12(b)(1) (directed at the first amended complaint) (Dkt. No. 45); (4) Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [*3] Rule 12(b)(6) (directed at the first amended complaint) (Dkt. No. 47); (5) Defendants' Motion to Dismiss re: Improper Addition of Claims and Parties (directed at the first amended complaint) (Dkt. No. 49); and (6) Plaintiffs' Motion for Equitable Tolling (Dkt. No. 62). For the reasons set forth herein, the court recommends as follows:
(a) that Defendants' motions to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) (Dkt. Nos. 34, 45) be denied;
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 220118 *
JAMPA GONPO, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. SONAM'S STONEWALLS & ART, LLC, d/b/a Sonam's Stonewalls & Art, and SONAM RINCHEN LAMA, Defendants.
Subsequent History: Adopted by, in part, Rejected by, in part, Dismissed by, in part, Motion denied by, in part, Motion denied by, Without prejudice, Motion granted by, in part Gonpo v. Sonam's Stonewalls & Art LLC, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60333, 2018 WL 1725695 (D. Mass., Apr. 9, 2018)
Costs and fees proceeding at, Motion granted by, in part, Motion denied by, in part Gonpo v. Sonam's Stonewalls & Art, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88853 (D. Mass., Apr. 1, 2021)
employees, Defendants', Plaintiffs', equitable tolling, first amended complaint, motion to dismiss, per hour, notice, amended complaint, recommends, state law claim, overtime, allegations, started, rights, similarly situated, supplemental jurisdiction, certification, district court, statute of limitations, rate of pay, deny leave, wages, stonemason, preempted, aggrieved individual, grounds, willful, opt-in, fair dealing