Preview
FILED
Superior Cwrt Of California,
SacrBmento
1 GARY R. BASHAM (SBN 130119)
05/06/2022
BASHAM LAW GROUP
2 8801 Folsom Blvd., Suite 280 mwflilams8
Sacramento, Califomia 95826 By „
-----..=-__., Deputy
3 Telephone: (916)282-0841 Case Number:
Facsimile: (916)266-7478 34-2022-00319439
4 garv@bashamlawgroup.com
5
Attomeys for Plaintiff ALEEZA KHAN, on behalf of herself, all
6 similarly aggrieved current and fomier employees of Defendant,
the Proposed CIEISS and the State of Califomia
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
10 ALEEZA KHAN, an individual on behalf Case No.
of herself and all others similarly situated,
11 Plaintiff, CLASS ACTION & PAGA COMPLAINT
(Califomia Code of Civil Procedure §382 and Labor
12 Code §§2698 etseq.)
13 NEXTGEN LABORATORIES, INC., a
Califomia corporation. (1) Failure to Reimburse For Business Expenses;
14 (2) Failure to Pay Minimum Wages;
Defendants. (3) Failure to Pay Overtime Wages;
15 (4) Failure to Furnish Accurate Itemized Wage
Statements;
16 (5) Failure to Timely Pay All Wages Due at
Termination - Waiting Time Penalties;
17 (6) Unfair Business Practices; and
(7) Private Attomeys' General Act.
18
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
19
20
21 Plaintiff Aleeza Khan ("Plaintiff), on behalf of herself and all others similarly
22 situated, hereby files this Class Action and PAGA Complaint ("Complaint") against Defendants
23 NextGen Laboratories, Inc. and Does 1-10 (collectively referred to as "Defendants"). Plaintiff
24 complains and alleges as follows:
25 ///
26
///
27
28 ///
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 I. INTRODUCTION
2 1. This is a Class Action, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §382, seeking
3 damages, restitution, injunctive relief, penalties, reasonable attomeys' fees and costs, imder the
4 Califomia Labor Code as set forth herein, on behalf of Plaintiff and all other individuals who are
5 or have been employed by Defendants in Califomia as Territory Managers and other sales
6 positions and labelled by Defendants as exempt employees ("Exempt Sales Class Members"). As
7 a result of the misclassification as exempt employees, Plaintiff and Exempt Sales Class Members
8 worked more than 8 hours a day and/or 40 hours a week for Defendants but were not paid for this
9 time worked in violation of the provisions of Labor Code §§ 510,1194, 1194.2, and 1197, and the
10 applicable Wage Order, without limitation. Defendants therefore owes Plaintiff and Exempt
11 Sales Class Members minimimi and overtime wages, as well as liquidated damages. Further, as a
12 result of this misclassification. Defendant did not provide Plaintiff and Exempt Sales Class
13 Members wdth accurate itemized wage statements in violation of Labor Code §226. The
14 statements did not provide actual hours worked, correct applicable hourly rates (including
15 overtime rates), as well as accurate gross and net wages. In addition, Defendants failed to pay
16 Plaintiff and Exempt Sales Class Members who are former employees of Defendants with all
17 wages owing and due at the end of their employment with Defendants in violation of Labor Code
18 §§201-203.
19 2. Moreover, Plaintiff, other Califomia Territory Managers and other Sales
20 employees, as well as the Sales Director and the Vice President of Sales, also were required to
21 work remotely and incurred business expenses as a result, but received no reimbursement,
22 restitution or compensation for these business expenses in violation of Labor Code section 2802.
23 Further, as a result of the Covid-19 Pandemic, many other Califomia based employees of
24 Defendants were required to work remotely and incurred business expenses, but received no
25 reimbursement, restitution or compensation for these business expenses in violation of Labor
26 Code section 2802. These employees are collectively referred to as "Labor Code section 2802
27 Class Members."
28 3. This also is a representative action imder the Labor Code Private Attomeys
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 2
DAMAGES /VND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 General Act of 2004, Labor Code §§2698 et seq. ("PAGA"). Plaintiff seeks penalties, reasonable
2 attomeys' fees and costs, under PAGA as set forth herein, on behalf of Plaintiff, the State of
3 Califomia and all other individuals who are or have been employed by Defendants in Califomia
4 during the relevant time period, who are described herein as Exempt Sales Class Members and/or
5 Labor Code section 2802 Class Members, and who suffered any of the Labor Code violations
6 described herein during the relevant time period.
7 4. The "Class Period" is designated firom four years prior to the filing of the
8 instant Complaint through the time the Court certifies this case as a class action. Plaintiff is
9 informed and believes that the Labor Code violations asserted herein have been going on for at
10 least four years prior to the filing of this action, and are continuing and will continue unless and
11 until the Court enjoins this unlawful conduct.
12 IL PARTIES
13 5. Defendant is a laboratory company that provides healthcare testing
14 solutions to its clients, including but not limited to Covid-19 testing. Defendant is a Califomia
15 Corporation with its corporate offices located in Newport Beach, Califomia. Defendant's other
16 California offices are located in Bakersfield and Atascadero, Califomia
17 6. From August 2 through November 15, 2021, Plaintiff worked for
18 Defendant as a Territory Manager, which was essentially a sales representative. Defendant did
19 not provide Plaintiff with an office; instead. Defendant required Plaintiff to work remotely from
20 her residence. Further, Defendant labelled and treated Plaintiff as an exempt employee.
21 7. The tme names and capacities of Defendants Does 1 through 10, inclusive,
22 whether individual, corporate, associate, agent, employee, or otherwise, are unknown to Plaintiff
23 at the time of filing this Complaint; therefore. Plaintiff sue said Defendants by such fictitious
24 names and will ask leave of Court to amend this Complaint to show their tme names or capacities
25 when the same have been ascertained. Plaintiff is infonned and believes, and based thereon
26 alleges, that each of the Doe Defendants is, in some manner, responsible for the events and
27 violations of law herein set forth. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants proximately caused injury and
28 damages to Plaintiffs as herein alleged.
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 3
DAMAGES /VND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 8. At all times herein mentioned, each of the Defendants was acting as the
2 principal, parent, agent and/or subsidiary of each of the remaining Defendants, and were, at all
3 times herein mentioned, acting within the scope of said relationship. Plaintiff is informed and
4 believes that each Defendant carried out a joint scheme, conspiracy, business plan or policy in all
5 respects pertinent hereto, and the acts of each Defendant are legally attributable to the other
6 Defendants. Defendants encouraged and solicited one another to perform the conduct alleged
7 herein, and ratified each other's conduct. Whenever and wherever reference is made in this
8 Complaint to any act by a Defendant or Defendants, inclusive of the Does, such allegations and
9 references shall also be deemed to mean the acts and failures to act legally attributable to each
10 Defendant acting individually, jointly, and/or severally.
11 IIL JURISDICTION AND VENUE.
12 9. This court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because, at all relevant
13 times, Defendant maintains its corporate offices in Califomia, and was doing business in the State
14 of Califomia, including Sacramento County.
15 10. Venue is proper in the County of Solano in accordance with Code of Civil
16 Procedure §395.5 because this a county were the obligation or liability arises under the Califomia
17 Labor Code.
18 IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
19 11. At all relevant times, Defendants are and have been subject to the
20 Califomia Labor Code, including Labor Code §2802.
21 12. From August 2 through November 15, 2021, Plaintiff worked for
22 Defendants as a Territory Manager, which was essentially a sales representative. Defendant did
23 not provide Plaintiff with an office; instead, Defendants required Plaintiff to work remotely from
24 her residence. While Defendants did provide Plaintiff with some work items, such as a cell phone
25 and a laptop, many other required work items were not supplied or paid for by Defendants. Such
26 compensable items included, but are not limited to, the following: a dedicated room for an office
27 at Plaintiff's residence; intemet service; utilities; printer/scanner; toner; printer paper, desk for
28 printer; stapler with staples; paper clips; staple remover; binder clips; stacked paper tray; office
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 4
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 fan; scissors; notepads; Post-Its; pens; tape and tape dispenser; pens and pen holder; HDMl cable;
2 USB Cable; orthopedic seat cushion; HD webcam;; cell phone hands free ear piece suggested by
3 Defendant; office desk; office chair; laptop stand; extemal keyboard; extemal mouse; extemal
4 monitor; mousepad; office shelf stand; ergonomic under desk foot stool; small filing cabinet;
5 folders; office trash can; laptop carrying bag; car charger for company cell phone; office lamp;
6 dry erase board; other office related items. As a result of this policy, practice and/or procedure to
7 require Plaintiff to work remotely in her residence, Defendants seek to avoid the business costs of
8 providing Plaintiff an office and related items and place those costs on Plaintiff This policy,
9 practice and/or procedure violates Labor Code section 2802.
10 13. Plaintiff is informed and believes that the other Califomia Territory
11 Managers and other Sales Representatives, as well as the Sales Director and the Vice President of
12 Sales, also were required to work remotely and incurred many of the business expenses listed
13 above as a result, but received no reimbursement, restitution or compensation for these business
14 expenses m violation of Labor Code section 2802. Further, Plaintiffis informed and believes
15 that, as a result of the Covid-19 Pandemic, many other Califomia based employees of Defendant
16 were required to work remotely and incurred many ofthe business expenses listed above, but
17 received no reimbursement, restitution or compensation for these business expenses.
18 Accordingly, Defendants' policy, practice, and/or procedure requiring Plaintiff and other current
19 and former Califomia employees of Defendants to incur business expenses as described herein
20 without reimbursing them for said expenses (or compensating them for said use) violates Labor
21 Code §2802. Defendant has the specific data on the names, positions and contact information of
22 all of the aggrieved employees who were required to work remotely and incur business expenses
23 without any reimbursement, restitution or compensation by Defendant in violation of Labor Code
24 section 2802. These employees are collectively referred to as "Labor Code section 2802 Class
25 Members."
26 14. Moreover, throughout her employment with Defendant, Defendant paid
27 Plaintiff on a salary basis and unlawfully treated Plaintiff as exempt fi-om overtime and other
28 obligations under the Labor Code. However, Plaintiffs job was not properly an exempt position.
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 5
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 No exemptions applied to the position, including the outside salesperson exemption. Plaintiff
2 never spent more than 50% of Plaintiffs workday away from her home office engaged in sales
3 duties. As a result. Plaintiff worked more than 8 hours a day and/or 40 hours a week for
4 Defendant but was not paid for this time worked. Defendant owes Plaintiff minimum and
5 overtime wages.
6 15. Further, as a result of this misclassification. Defendants did not provide
7 Plaintiff with accurate itemized wage statements. The statements did not provide actual hours
8 worked, correct applicable hourly rates (including overtime rates), as well as accurate gross and
9 net wages.
10 16. Also, Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff all wages owing and due within 72
11 hours of Plaintiffs resignation of employment. Defendants still owes Plaintiff minimum and
12 overtime wages. As a result. Defendants are subject to waiting time penalties for their failure to
13 pay Plaintiff all wages owdng and due in a prompt manner.
14 17. Plaintiff is informed and believes that the other Califomia Territory
15 Managers and other Sales positions were unlawfully treated as exempt from the Labor Code as
16 was Plaintiff. As a result of this misclassification. Plaintiff is informed and believes that the other
17 Califomia Territory Managers and other Sales employees who worked more than 8 hours a day
18 and/or more than 40 hours a week did not receive the required minimum and overtime wages for
19 all hours worked. Further, these aggrieved employees also did not receive accurate wage
20 statements, and former aggrieved employees have not received compensation for all hours
21 worked at the end of their employment with Defendants, subjecting Defendants to waiting time
22 penalties.
23 18. Accordingly, Defendants consistently, willfully, and deliberately (a) failed
24 to pay Plaintiff and similarly situated employees at least minimum wages for all hours worked in
25 violation of Labor Code §1197 and the applicable Wage Order; (b) failed to pay Plaintiff and
26 similarly situated employees all overtime wages owed for all overtime hours worked in violation
27 of Labor Code §510 and the applicable Wage Order; (c) failed to provide Plaintiff and similarly
28 situated employees with accurate wage statements in violation of Labor Code §226; and (d) failed
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR g
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 to pay Plaintiff and similarly situated former employees all wages owing and due at the end of
2 their employment with Defendants.
3 19. Defendants' foregoing wrongful acts constitute continuing and ongoing
4 unlawful activity in violation of the Labor Code and Business & Professions Code § 17200, et
5 seq. ("Unfair Competition Law"). Accordingly, Defendants should be enjoined from continuing
6 to violate the Labor Code and the Unfair Competition Law as set forth herein, including but not
7 limited to an injunction ordering Defendants to cease the unlawful business practices in violation
8 of the Labor Code and the Unfair Competition Law.
9
10 V. CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
11 20. Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of herself and all others similarly
12 situated as a Class Action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §382. The First Class that
13 Plaintiff seeks to represent is the following: All persons who are or have been employed in
14 Califomia at any time from four years prior to the filing of this action through the date of the
15 Court's granting of class certification in this matter by Defendants and who were Territory
16 Managers and/or other sales positions and who were misclassified by Defendants as exempt
17 employees ("Exempt Sales Class Members"). The Second Class that Plaintiff seeks to represent is
18 the following: All persons who are or have been employed in Califomia at any time from four
19 years prior to the filing of this action through the date of the Court's granting of class certification
20 in this matter by Defendants and who were required at any time to work remotely and incurred
21 business expenses, but received no reimbursement, restitution or compensation for these business
22 expenses in violation of Labor Code section 2802 ("Labor Code section 2802 Class Members").
23 21. Plaintiff further alleges Sub-Classes for the Exempt Sales Class Members
24 as follows:
25 (a) Overtime and Minimum Wage Sub-Class: All Exempt Sales Class
26 Members who do not qualify for any overtime exemption under Califomia law for
27 any pay period during the Class Period and who worked more than 8 hours a day
28 or more than 40 hours a week for any such pay period at any time from four years
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 7
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 prior to the filing of this action through the date of the Court's granting of class
2 certification in this matter.
3 (b) Wage Statement Penalty Sub-Class: All Exempt Sales Class
4 Members who do not qualify for any overtime exemption under Califomia law for
5 any pay period at any time from one year prior to the filing of this action through
6 the date of the Court's granting of class certification in this matter.
7 (c) Waiting Time Penalty Sub-Class: All Exempt Sales Class Members
8 who are former employees and who do not qualify for any overtime exemption
9 under Califomia law at any time from four years prior to the filing of this action
10 through the date of the Court's granting of class certification in this matter.
11 22. This action has been brought and may be maintained as a class action under
12 Code of Civil Procedure §382 because there is a well-defined community of interest in the
13 litigation and the proposed class is easily ascertainable.
14 23. Numerosity: The potential members of the Classes as defined herein are
15 numerous and therefore joinder of all of the members of the Class is impracticable, especially
16 when employee tumover during the Class Period is taken into account. Defendants' employment
17 records applicable to the Class are required before an accurate number can be determined, but
18 Plaintiff is informed and believes that the potential members of the class are over 50 current and
19 former employees of Defendants.
20 24. Commonality: There are questions of law and fact that are common to
21 Plaintiff and the Class that predominate over any questions affecting only individual members of
22 the potential Class, including but not limited to the following:
23 (a) Whether Defendants improperly misclassified Plaintiff and the
24 Exempt Sales Class Members as exempt employees;
25 (b) Whether Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales
26 Class Members all wages eamed, including minimum and overtime wages;
27 (c) Whether Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff'and the Exempt
28 Sales Class Members with compliant itemized wage statements;
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR g
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 (d) Whether Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales
2 Class Members all wages that were owed to them at the time their employment with Defendants
3 terminated; and
4 (e) Whether Defendants required Plaintiff and the Labor Code section
5 2802 Class Members at any fime to work remotely and incurred business expenses, but received
6 no reimbursement, restitution or compensation for these business expenses in violation of Labor
7 Code secfion 2802.
8 25. Typicality: PlaintifFs Labor Code claims are typical of the Two Classes.
9 Plaintiffs misclassification claims are the same as the Exempt Sales Class Members. Further,
10 Plaintiffs Labor Code section 2802 claims are the same the Labor Code section 2802 Class
11 Members.
12 26. Adequacy of Representation: Plaintiff is a member of both Classes and
13 will fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests ofthe Classes. Plaintiffs interests
14 do not conflict with the interests of the Classes. Plaintiffs counsel is competent and experienced
15 in litigating wage and hour class actions and will devote sufficient time and resources to the case
16 and adequately represent the interests of both Classes.
17 27. Superiority: A class action is superior to other available mezms for the fair
18 and efficient adjudication of the instant controversy since individual joinder of all members of the
19 class is impracticable. Class action treatment will permit a larger number of similarly situated
20 persons to prosecute their common claims in a single forum simultaneously, efficiently, and
21 without the unnecessary duplication of effort and expense that numerous individual actions would
22 create. Further, as damages suffered by each individual member of the class may be relatively
23 small, the expenses and burden of the individual litigation would make it difficult or impossible
24 for individual members of the Class to redress the wrongs done to them, and an important public
25 interest will be served by addressing the matter as a Class Action. The cost to the court system of
26 adjudication of such individualized litigation would be substantial. Individualized litigation
27 would also present the potential for inconsistent or contradictory judgments.
28
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 9
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 VI. CAUSES OF ACTION
2 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
FAILURE TO REIMBURSE FOR BUSINESS EXPENSES
3
(BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of the Labor Code section 2802 Class
4 Members, AGAINST A L L DEFENDANTS)
5 28. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate herein by reference the allegations
6 contained in Paragraphs 2, 4 through 13, and 20 through 27 of the Complaint as though fiilly set
7 forth herein.
8 29. Defendants passed on and avoided their own business operating expenses
9 by requiring Plaintiff and the Labor Code section 2802 Class Members to work remotely and
10 incur business expenses, and failing to provide to Plaintiff and the Labor Code section 2802 Class
11 Members any reimbursement, restitution or compensation for these business expenses.
12 Defendants' actions as described herein violate Labor Code §2802.
13 30. Plaintiff and the Labor Code section 2802 Class Members are entitled to
14 compensation, restitution and/or reimbursement of all such expenses and other relief, including
15 recovery of interest, attorneys' fees and costs of suit.
16
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
17 „
FAILURE TO PAY FOR ALL HOURS WORKED - MINIMUM
18 WAGES
1^ (BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of the Exempt Sales Class Members,
AGAINST A L L DEFENDANTS)
20
31. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations
21
contained in Paragraphs 1, 4 through 10, 14, 17, 18 and 20 through 27 of the Complaint as though
22
fiilly set forth herein.
23
32. Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class Members have suffered unpaid
24
minimum wages, as Defendants have failed to pay Plaintiff and the Class for all hours worked,
25
instead paying Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class Members a salary without regard to the
26
number of hours worked.
27
33. Califomia Labor Code §1197 provides that "[t]he minimum wage for
28
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 1Q
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 employees fixed by the Commission is the minimum wage to be paid to employees, and payment
2 of less than the minimum so fixed is unlawful.
3 34. The applicable minimum wage fixed by the commission for employees
4 such as Plaintiff is found in section 4(A) of the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage
5 Order and Labor Code §1182.12.
6 35. The minimum wage provisions of the Califomia Labor Code are
7 enforceable by private action pursuant to Labor Code § 1194(a), which states:
8 "Notwithstanding any agreement to work for a lesser wage, any employee
receiving less than the legal minimum wage or the legal overtime
9 compensation applicable to the employee is entitled to recover in a civil
action the unpaid balance of the ftill amount of the minimum wage or
10 overtime compensation, including interest thereon, reasonable attomey's
fees, and costs of suit.
11 36. As described in Califomia Labor Code §§1185 and 1194.2, any such action
12 incorporates the applicable Wage Order of the Industrial Welfare Commission.
13 37. Califomia Labor Code § 1194.2 also provides for the following remedies:
14
.. "In any action ... under Section ... 1194 ... to recover wages because of
the payment of a wage less than the minimum wage fixed by an order of
the commission, an employee shall be entitled to recover liquidated
16 damages in an amount equal to the wages unlawfully unpaid and interest
thereon."
17
38. Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class Members therefore are entitled to
18
recover their unpaid minimum wages and liquidated damages in an amount equal to the minimum
19
wages unlawfully unpaid, and interest thereon.
20
39. As a result of Defendants' unlawful actions. Plaintiff has been required to
21
retain an attomey and to incur attomey's fees and costs in pursuit of this cause of action. Plaintiff
22
is entitled to recover her reasonable attomey's fees and costs incurred herein pursuant to Labor
23
Code section 1194.
24
///
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR ]1
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE REUEF
1 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
2 FAILURE TO PAY FOR ALL HOURS WORKED - OVERTIME
WAGES
3
(BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of the Exempt Sales Class Members,
4 AGAINST A L L DEFENDANTS)
5 40. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations
6 contained in Paragraphs 1, 4 through 10, 14, 17, 18, and 20 through 27 of the Complaint as
7 though fully set forth herein.
8 41. Califomia Labor Code §510(a) provides, in pertinent part, as
9 follows:
10 "Eight hours of labor constitutes a day's work. Any work in excess of
eight hours in one workday and any work in excess of 40 hours in any one
11 workweek and the first eight hours worked on the seventh day of work in
any one workweek shall be compensated at the rate of no less than one and
12 one-half times the regular rate of pay for an employee. Any work in excess
of 12 hours in one day shall be compensated at the rate of no less than
13 twice the regular rate of pay for an employee. In addition, any work in
excess of eight hours on any seventh day of a workweek shall be
14 compensated at the rate of no less than twice the regular rate of pay of an
employee.
15
42. Section 3 of the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order,
16
which at all times mentioned herein govemed the employment of Plaintiff with Defendants,
17
provides in pertinent part:
18
"Daily Overtime - General Provisions
19
(1) The following overtime provisions are applicable to employees 18
20 years of age or over and to employees 16 or 17 years of age who are not
required by law to attend school and are not otherwise prohibited by law
21 from engaging in the subject work. Such employees shall not be employed
more than eight (8) hours in any workday or more than 40 hours in any
22 workweek unless the employee receives one and one-half (1-1/2) times
such employee's regular rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 hours in
23 the workweek. Eight (8) hours of labor constitutes a day's work.
Employment beyond eight (8) hours in any workday or more than six (6)
24 days in any workweek is permissible provided the employee is
compensated for such overtime at not less than:
25
(a) One and one-half (11/2) times the employee's regular rate of pay for
26 all hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours up to and including 12 hours
in any workday, and for the first eight (8) hours worked on the seventh
27 (7th) consecutive day of work in a workweek; and
28
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR J2
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 (b) Double the employee's regular rate of pay for all hours worked in
excess of 12 hours in any workday and for all hours worked in excess of
2 eight (8) hours on the seventh (7th) consecutive day of work in a
workweek."
3
43. During all times mentioned herein. Defendants required, allowed, suffered,
4
and/or permitted Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class Members to work in excess of eight (8)
5
hours in one work day or forty (40) hours per week without being compensated at the applicable
6
overtime rate of pay in accordance with the provisions of Califomia Labor Code §510 and
7
Section 3 of the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order.
8
44. Defendants have failed to pay Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class
9
Members for all overtime wages owed, as required by law, including failing to pay Plaintiff and
10
the Exempt Sales Class Members overtime pay for work they performed in excess of forty (40)
11
hours per week and in excess of eight (8) hours per day. By failing to provide timely and proper
12
compensation, as alleged above. Defendants have knowingly, willfully and deliberately violated
13
and continue to violate the provisions of Labor Code sections 510 and 1194 and the applicable
14
Wage Order, without limitation.
15
45. During all relevant periods in this matter, Califomia overtime laws applied
16
to Defendants and provided that any work performed by an employee in excess of forty (40)
17
hours per workweek or eight (8) hours per day be compensated at one and one half times or two
18
times the employee's regular rate of pay. Defendants did not compensate Plaintiff and the
19
Exempt Sales Class Members for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours per workweek or
20
eight (8) hours per workday and/or did not compensate Plaintiff and Exempt Sales Class
21
Members at the applicable overtime rate of pay. Thus, Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class
22
Members are entitled to recover their unpaid overtime compensation.
23
46. As a result of Defendants' unlawful actions. Plaintiff has been required to
24
retain an attomey and to incur attomey's fees and costs in pursuit of this cause of action. Plaintiff
25
is entitled to recover her reasonable attomey's fees and costs incurred herein pursuant to Labor
26
Code section 1194.
27
///
28
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 13
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
FAILURE TO FURNISH ACCURATE ITEMIZED WAGE STATEMENTS
2
(BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of the Exempt Sales Class Members,
3 AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS)
4 47. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations
5 contained in Paragraphs 1, 4 through 10, 14, 15, 17, 18 and 20 through 27 of the Complaint as
6 though fully set forth herein.
7 48. Defendants knowingly and intentionally fumished Plaintiff and the
8 Exempt Sales Class Members with inaccurate and false itemized statements as described herein,
9 as required by Labor Code §226, and the applicable Wage Order and Califomia Regulations.
10 49. Pursuant to Labor Code §226, Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class
11 Members are entitled to recover the greater of all actual damages or fifty dollars ($50) for the
12 initial pay period in which a violation occurs and one hundred dollars ($100) per employee for
13 each violation in a subsequent pay period, not to exceed an aggregate penalty of four thousand
14 dollars ($4,000) each.
15 50. As a result of Defendants' unlawful actions. Plaintiff has been required to
16 retain an attomey and to incur attomey's fees and costs in pursuit of this cause of action. Plaintiff
17 is entitled to recover her reasonable attomey's fees and costs incurred herein pursuant to Labor
18 Code section 226.
19 FIFTH CAUSE QF ACTION
FAILURE TO TIMELY PAY ALL WAGES DUE AT TERMINATION - WAITING TIME
20 PENALTIES
21 (BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of the Exempt Sales Class Members ,
AGAINST A L L DEFENDANTS)
22
51. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations
23
contained in Paragraphs 1, 4 through 10, 14, 16 through 18, 20 through 27 and 31 through 46 of
24
the Complaint as though fully set forth herein.
25
52. Califomia Labor Code §201 requires an employer who discharges an
26
employee to pay compensation due and owing to said employee immediately upon discharge.
27
Labor Code §202 requires an employer to promptly pay compensation due and owing to said
28
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 14
DAMAGES AND INKJNCTIVE RELIEF
1 employee within seventy-two (72) hours of that employee's termination of employment by
2 resignation. Califomia Labor Code §203 provides that i f an employer willftilly fails to pay
3 compensation promptly upon discharge or resignation, as required under §§201 and 202, then the
4 employer is liable for waiting time penalties in the form of continued compensation for up to
5 thirty (30) work days.
6 53. Defendants willfully failed and refused, and continue to willfully fail and
7 refuse, to timely pay all compensation and wages due to Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class
8 Members upon the cessation of their employment, as required by Labor Code §§201-202.
9 54. As a result of Defendants' unlawful acts. Defendants are liable to Plaintiff
10 and the Exempt Sales Class Members who are no longer employed by Defendants for waiting
11 time penalties under Labor Code §203, together with interest thereon pursuant to Labor Code
12 section 218.6.
13 55. As a result of Defendants' unlawful actions. Plaintiff has been required to
14 retain an attomey and to incur attomey's fees and costs in pursuit of this cause of action.
15 Plaintiff is entitled to recover her reasonable attomey's fees and costs incurred herein pursuant to
16 Labor Code section 218.5.
17 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES
18
(BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of All Class Members, AGAINST ALL
19 DEFENDANTS)
20 56. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate herein by reference the allegations
21 contained in Paragraphs 1 through 55 of the Complaint as though fully set forth herein.
22 57. Defendants' foregoing wrongful acts in violation of the Labor Code
23 constitute continuing and ongoing unlawful activity prohibited by Business & Professions Code §
24 17200, et seq. ("the Unfair Competition Law") and justifies the issuance of an injunction,
25 restitution, and other equitable relief pursuant to Business & Professions Code § 17203.
26 58. Defendants' conduct described herein was directly in violation of
27 Califomia's wage and hour laws, and it constitutes and was intended to constitute imfair
28 competition and unlawful and unfair acts and practices within the meaning of the Unfair
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR (5
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 Competition Law.
2 59. Through their wrongful and unlawful acts, as described herein. Defendants
3 have acted contrary to the public policy of this State.
4 60. Defendants have engaged in unlawful business acts and practices by
5 violating Califomia law including, but not limited to, the Labor Code, the applicable IWC Wage
6 Order, and other violation of law discussed herein.
7 61. As a result of their unlawful, unfair, and/or fraudulent acts. Defendants
8 have reaped and continues to reap unfair benefits and illegal profits at the expense of Plaintiff, the
9 Exempt Sales Class Members and the Labor Code section 2802 Class Members.
10 62. Therefore, under the provisions of the Unfair Competition Law, the Labor
11 Code, and the applicable IWC Wage Order, Defendants should be enjoined from this activity and
12 should provide restitution to Plaintiff, the Exempt Sales Class Members and the Labor Code
13 section 2802 Class Members for the wrongfully withheld wages, reimbursement restitution,
14 compensation and other benefits pursuant to Business and Professions Code §17203, in a sum
15 according to proof for the 4-year period preceding the filing of this Complaint up to and including
16 the present.
17 SEVENTH CAUSE QF ACTION
CALIFORNU PRIVATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL ACT
18
(BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and the State of
19 California, AGAINST A L L DEFENDANTS)
20 63. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations
21 contained in Paragraphs 1 through 55 of the Complaint as though fully set forth herein.
22 64. The Court has jurisdiction of this cause of action pursuant to Labor Code
23 §§2699,et seq.
24 65. Plaintiff is an "aggrieved employee" as defined under Labor Code
25 §2699(c), and thus has standing to bring this action on behalf of all Califomia Employees whose
26 rights under the Labor Code where violated by Defendants, as described herein, pursuant to Labor
27 Code §§2699(a) and 2699.3.
28 66. Labor Code §2699(a) provides: "Notwithstanding any other provision of
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 law, any provision of this code that provides for a civil penalty to be assessed and collected by the
2 Labor and Workforce Development Agency or any of its departments, divisions, commissions,
3 boards, agencies, or employees, for a violation of this code, may, as an altemative, be recovered
4 through a civil action brought by an aggrieved employee on behalf of herself or herself and other
5 current or former employees pursuant to the procedures specified in Section 2699.3."
6 67. Labor Code §2699(f) provides: "For all provisions of this code except
7 those for which a civil penalty is specifically provided, there is established a civil penalty for a
8 violation of these provisions, as follows:... (2) If, at the time of the alleged violation, the person
9 employs one or more employees, the civil penalty is one hundred dollars ($100) for each
10 aggrieved employee per pay period for the initial violation and two hundred dollars ($200) for
11 each aggrieved employee per pay period for each subsequent violation."
12 68. Defendant required Plaintiff, other Territory Managers and other sales
13 employees employed by Defendant in Califomia to incur business expenses by requiring them to
14 work at home offices as described herein without reimbursing them for said expenses or
15 compensating them for said use in violation of Labor Code §2802. Further, as a result of the
16 Pandemic, Defendant required other employees to incur business expenses by requiring them to
17 work at home offices as described herein without reimbursing them for said expenses or
18 compensating them for said use in violation of Labor Code §2802.
19 69. Califomia Labor Code §1197 provides that "[t]he minimum wage for
20 employees fixed by the Commission is the minimum wage to be paid to employees, and payment
21 of less than the minimum so fixed is unlawful." Plaintiff, other Territory Managers and other
22 sales employees imlawflilly labeled by Defendant as exempt were not paid at least minimum
23 wages for all hours worked as required by law as described herein. In failing and refusing to
24 provide timely and proper compensation. Defendant has knowingly, willfully and deliberately
25 violated and continues to violate the provisions of Labor Code §§ 1194, 1194.2, and 1197, and
26 the applicable Wage Order, without limitation.
27 70. At all relevant times herein. Defendant required, allowed, suffered and/or
28 permitted Plaintiff, and on information and belief other Territory Managers and other sales
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR \7
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 employees unlawfully labeled by Defendant as exempt to work more than eight (8) hours per day
2 and/or forty (40) hours per week, but received no overtime compensation. In failing to provide
3 timely and proper overtime compensation at the correct overtime rate, as alleged above,
4 Defendant knowingly, willfully and deliberately violated the provisions of Labor Code §§510
5 and 1194.
6 71. Defendant knowingly and intentionally failed to fiimish Plaintiff, and on
7 information and belief other Territory Managers and other sales employees unlawfully labeled by
8 Defendant as exempt with accurate itemized wage statements, as required by Labor Code §226
9 and the applicable Wage Order, without limitation. As a result of Defendant Employer's unlawful
10 acts. Defendant is liable for the amounts provided by Labor Code §226, including attomey's fees
11 and costs.
12 72. Califomia Labor Code §201 requires an employer who discharges an
13 employee to pay all compensation due and owing to said employee immediately upon discharge.
14 Labor Code §202 requires an employer to promptly pay compensation due and owing to said
15 employee within seventy-two (72) hours of that employee's termination of employment by
16 resignation. Califomia Labor Code §203 provides that i f an employer willfully fails to pay
17 compensation promptly upon discharge or resignation, as required under §§201 and 202, then the
18 employer is liable for waiting time penalties in the form of continued compensation for up to
19 thirty (30) work days. Defendant willfully failed and refused, and continue to willfully fail and
20 refuse to timely pay all compensation and wages due to Plaintiff similarly situated former
21 Territory Managers and other sales employees upon the cessation of their employment, as
22 required by Labor Code § §201 -203.
23 73. Plaintiff has suffered an injury in fact and lost money or property as a
24 result of the aforementioned violations by Defendants. Plaintiff is informed and believes and
25 thereon alleges that other current and former similarly situated Califomia Employees, as describe
26 ed herein, also suffered injury as a result of the violations.
27 74. As a result. Plaintiff seeks civil penalties as provided under applicable
28 Labor Code sections for violations of the Labor Code alleged herein pursuant to Labor
PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR lg
DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1 Code§2699(a). To the extent that any violation alleged herein does not carry a penalty, Plaintiff
2 seeks civil penalties pursuant to Labor Code §2699(f) for Plaintiff and other current and former
3 similarly situated Califomia Employees for violations of those sections.
4 75. Plaintiff seeks penalties on behalf of herself, other current and former
5 similarly situated Califomia Employees of Defendants, and the State, as provided by Labor Code
6 §2699(i). Affected employees are numerous, and it would be impracticable to bring all the
7 affected co-employees before the Court.
8 76. Plaintiffs PAGA claim does not require Class Certification. Plaintiff does
9 not need a Court Order authorizing the representation of the class for this cause of action.
10 77. Plaintiff believes that Defendant violated numerous provisions of the
11 Califomia Labor Code and applicable Wage Order, including without limitation: Labor Code
12 §§201, 202, 226, 510, 1194, 1194.2, 1197, and 2802. As a resuh of these violations, and under
13 the provisions of PAGA, Plaintiff, on behalf of herself, other similarly situated employees, and
14 the State, will seek penalties against Defendant under and without limitation to: Labor Code §§
15 226.3,256, 558, 1197.1, and/or 2699(f).
16 78. For instance, by way of illustration and without limitation. Plaintiff will
17 seek the following civil penalties against Defendant for Plaintiff, the State and each aggrieved
18 employee:
19 a. Plaintiff seeks civil penalties under Labor Code §2699(f) for Defendant's
20 failure to reimburse business expenses in violation of Labor Code §2802;
21 b. Plaintiff seeks civil penalties
Preview
FILED Superior Cwrt Of California, SacrBmento 1 GARY R. BASHAM (SBN 130119) 05/06/2022 BASHAM LAW GROUP 2 8801 Folsom Blvd., Suite 280 mwflilams8 Sacramento, Califomia 95826 By „ -----..=-__., Deputy 3 Telephone: (916)282-0841 Case Number: Facsimile: (916)266-7478 34-2022-00319439 4 garv@bashamlawgroup.com 5 Attomeys for Plaintiff ALEEZA KHAN, on behalf of herself, all 6 similarly aggrieved current and fomier employees of Defendant, the Proposed CIEISS and the State of Califomia 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO 10 ALEEZA KHAN, an individual on behalf Case No. of herself and all others similarly situated, 11 Plaintiff, CLASS ACTION & PAGA COMPLAINT (Califomia Code of Civil Procedure §382 and Labor 12 Code §§2698 etseq.) 13 NEXTGEN LABORATORIES, INC., a Califomia corporation. (1) Failure to Reimburse For Business Expenses; 14 (2) Failure to Pay Minimum Wages; Defendants. (3) Failure to Pay Overtime Wages; 15 (4) Failure to Furnish Accurate Itemized Wage Statements; 16 (5) Failure to Timely Pay All Wages Due at Termination - Waiting Time Penalties; 17 (6) Unfair Business Practices; and (7) Private Attomeys' General Act. 18 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 19 20 21 Plaintiff Aleeza Khan ("Plaintiff), on behalf of herself and all others similarly 22 situated, hereby files this Class Action and PAGA Complaint ("Complaint") against Defendants 23 NextGen Laboratories, Inc. and Does 1-10 (collectively referred to as "Defendants"). Plaintiff 24 complains and alleges as follows: 25 /// 26 /// 27 28 /// PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 I. INTRODUCTION 2 1. This is a Class Action, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §382, seeking 3 damages, restitution, injunctive relief, penalties, reasonable attomeys' fees and costs, imder the 4 Califomia Labor Code as set forth herein, on behalf of Plaintiff and all other individuals who are 5 or have been employed by Defendants in Califomia as Territory Managers and other sales 6 positions and labelled by Defendants as exempt employees ("Exempt Sales Class Members"). As 7 a result of the misclassification as exempt employees, Plaintiff and Exempt Sales Class Members 8 worked more than 8 hours a day and/or 40 hours a week for Defendants but were not paid for this 9 time worked in violation of the provisions of Labor Code §§ 510,1194, 1194.2, and 1197, and the 10 applicable Wage Order, without limitation. Defendants therefore owes Plaintiff and Exempt 11 Sales Class Members minimimi and overtime wages, as well as liquidated damages. Further, as a 12 result of this misclassification. Defendant did not provide Plaintiff and Exempt Sales Class 13 Members wdth accurate itemized wage statements in violation of Labor Code §226. The 14 statements did not provide actual hours worked, correct applicable hourly rates (including 15 overtime rates), as well as accurate gross and net wages. In addition, Defendants failed to pay 16 Plaintiff and Exempt Sales Class Members who are former employees of Defendants with all 17 wages owing and due at the end of their employment with Defendants in violation of Labor Code 18 §§201-203. 19 2. Moreover, Plaintiff, other Califomia Territory Managers and other Sales 20 employees, as well as the Sales Director and the Vice President of Sales, also were required to 21 work remotely and incurred business expenses as a result, but received no reimbursement, 22 restitution or compensation for these business expenses in violation of Labor Code section 2802. 23 Further, as a result of the Covid-19 Pandemic, many other Califomia based employees of 24 Defendants were required to work remotely and incurred business expenses, but received no 25 reimbursement, restitution or compensation for these business expenses in violation of Labor 26 Code section 2802. These employees are collectively referred to as "Labor Code section 2802 27 Class Members." 28 3. This also is a representative action imder the Labor Code Private Attomeys PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 2 DAMAGES /VND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 General Act of 2004, Labor Code §§2698 et seq. ("PAGA"). Plaintiff seeks penalties, reasonable 2 attomeys' fees and costs, under PAGA as set forth herein, on behalf of Plaintiff, the State of 3 Califomia and all other individuals who are or have been employed by Defendants in Califomia 4 during the relevant time period, who are described herein as Exempt Sales Class Members and/or 5 Labor Code section 2802 Class Members, and who suffered any of the Labor Code violations 6 described herein during the relevant time period. 7 4. The "Class Period" is designated firom four years prior to the filing of the 8 instant Complaint through the time the Court certifies this case as a class action. Plaintiff is 9 informed and believes that the Labor Code violations asserted herein have been going on for at 10 least four years prior to the filing of this action, and are continuing and will continue unless and 11 until the Court enjoins this unlawful conduct. 12 IL PARTIES 13 5. Defendant is a laboratory company that provides healthcare testing 14 solutions to its clients, including but not limited to Covid-19 testing. Defendant is a Califomia 15 Corporation with its corporate offices located in Newport Beach, Califomia. Defendant's other 16 California offices are located in Bakersfield and Atascadero, Califomia 17 6. From August 2 through November 15, 2021, Plaintiff worked for 18 Defendant as a Territory Manager, which was essentially a sales representative. Defendant did 19 not provide Plaintiff with an office; instead. Defendant required Plaintiff to work remotely from 20 her residence. Further, Defendant labelled and treated Plaintiff as an exempt employee. 21 7. The tme names and capacities of Defendants Does 1 through 10, inclusive, 22 whether individual, corporate, associate, agent, employee, or otherwise, are unknown to Plaintiff 23 at the time of filing this Complaint; therefore. Plaintiff sue said Defendants by such fictitious 24 names and will ask leave of Court to amend this Complaint to show their tme names or capacities 25 when the same have been ascertained. Plaintiff is infonned and believes, and based thereon 26 alleges, that each of the Doe Defendants is, in some manner, responsible for the events and 27 violations of law herein set forth. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants proximately caused injury and 28 damages to Plaintiffs as herein alleged. PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 3 DAMAGES /VND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 8. At all times herein mentioned, each of the Defendants was acting as the 2 principal, parent, agent and/or subsidiary of each of the remaining Defendants, and were, at all 3 times herein mentioned, acting within the scope of said relationship. Plaintiff is informed and 4 believes that each Defendant carried out a joint scheme, conspiracy, business plan or policy in all 5 respects pertinent hereto, and the acts of each Defendant are legally attributable to the other 6 Defendants. Defendants encouraged and solicited one another to perform the conduct alleged 7 herein, and ratified each other's conduct. Whenever and wherever reference is made in this 8 Complaint to any act by a Defendant or Defendants, inclusive of the Does, such allegations and 9 references shall also be deemed to mean the acts and failures to act legally attributable to each 10 Defendant acting individually, jointly, and/or severally. 11 IIL JURISDICTION AND VENUE. 12 9. This court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because, at all relevant 13 times, Defendant maintains its corporate offices in Califomia, and was doing business in the State 14 of Califomia, including Sacramento County. 15 10. Venue is proper in the County of Solano in accordance with Code of Civil 16 Procedure §395.5 because this a county were the obligation or liability arises under the Califomia 17 Labor Code. 18 IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 19 11. At all relevant times, Defendants are and have been subject to the 20 Califomia Labor Code, including Labor Code §2802. 21 12. From August 2 through November 15, 2021, Plaintiff worked for 22 Defendants as a Territory Manager, which was essentially a sales representative. Defendant did 23 not provide Plaintiff with an office; instead, Defendants required Plaintiff to work remotely from 24 her residence. While Defendants did provide Plaintiff with some work items, such as a cell phone 25 and a laptop, many other required work items were not supplied or paid for by Defendants. Such 26 compensable items included, but are not limited to, the following: a dedicated room for an office 27 at Plaintiff's residence; intemet service; utilities; printer/scanner; toner; printer paper, desk for 28 printer; stapler with staples; paper clips; staple remover; binder clips; stacked paper tray; office PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 4 DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 fan; scissors; notepads; Post-Its; pens; tape and tape dispenser; pens and pen holder; HDMl cable; 2 USB Cable; orthopedic seat cushion; HD webcam;; cell phone hands free ear piece suggested by 3 Defendant; office desk; office chair; laptop stand; extemal keyboard; extemal mouse; extemal 4 monitor; mousepad; office shelf stand; ergonomic under desk foot stool; small filing cabinet; 5 folders; office trash can; laptop carrying bag; car charger for company cell phone; office lamp; 6 dry erase board; other office related items. As a result of this policy, practice and/or procedure to 7 require Plaintiff to work remotely in her residence, Defendants seek to avoid the business costs of 8 providing Plaintiff an office and related items and place those costs on Plaintiff This policy, 9 practice and/or procedure violates Labor Code section 2802. 10 13. Plaintiff is informed and believes that the other Califomia Territory 11 Managers and other Sales Representatives, as well as the Sales Director and the Vice President of 12 Sales, also were required to work remotely and incurred many of the business expenses listed 13 above as a result, but received no reimbursement, restitution or compensation for these business 14 expenses m violation of Labor Code section 2802. Further, Plaintiffis informed and believes 15 that, as a result of the Covid-19 Pandemic, many other Califomia based employees of Defendant 16 were required to work remotely and incurred many ofthe business expenses listed above, but 17 received no reimbursement, restitution or compensation for these business expenses. 18 Accordingly, Defendants' policy, practice, and/or procedure requiring Plaintiff and other current 19 and former Califomia employees of Defendants to incur business expenses as described herein 20 without reimbursing them for said expenses (or compensating them for said use) violates Labor 21 Code §2802. Defendant has the specific data on the names, positions and contact information of 22 all of the aggrieved employees who were required to work remotely and incur business expenses 23 without any reimbursement, restitution or compensation by Defendant in violation of Labor Code 24 section 2802. These employees are collectively referred to as "Labor Code section 2802 Class 25 Members." 26 14. Moreover, throughout her employment with Defendant, Defendant paid 27 Plaintiff on a salary basis and unlawfully treated Plaintiff as exempt fi-om overtime and other 28 obligations under the Labor Code. However, Plaintiffs job was not properly an exempt position. PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 5 DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 No exemptions applied to the position, including the outside salesperson exemption. Plaintiff 2 never spent more than 50% of Plaintiffs workday away from her home office engaged in sales 3 duties. As a result. Plaintiff worked more than 8 hours a day and/or 40 hours a week for 4 Defendant but was not paid for this time worked. Defendant owes Plaintiff minimum and 5 overtime wages. 6 15. Further, as a result of this misclassification. Defendants did not provide 7 Plaintiff with accurate itemized wage statements. The statements did not provide actual hours 8 worked, correct applicable hourly rates (including overtime rates), as well as accurate gross and 9 net wages. 10 16. Also, Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff all wages owing and due within 72 11 hours of Plaintiffs resignation of employment. Defendants still owes Plaintiff minimum and 12 overtime wages. As a result. Defendants are subject to waiting time penalties for their failure to 13 pay Plaintiff all wages owdng and due in a prompt manner. 14 17. Plaintiff is informed and believes that the other Califomia Territory 15 Managers and other Sales positions were unlawfully treated as exempt from the Labor Code as 16 was Plaintiff. As a result of this misclassification. Plaintiff is informed and believes that the other 17 Califomia Territory Managers and other Sales employees who worked more than 8 hours a day 18 and/or more than 40 hours a week did not receive the required minimum and overtime wages for 19 all hours worked. Further, these aggrieved employees also did not receive accurate wage 20 statements, and former aggrieved employees have not received compensation for all hours 21 worked at the end of their employment with Defendants, subjecting Defendants to waiting time 22 penalties. 23 18. Accordingly, Defendants consistently, willfully, and deliberately (a) failed 24 to pay Plaintiff and similarly situated employees at least minimum wages for all hours worked in 25 violation of Labor Code §1197 and the applicable Wage Order; (b) failed to pay Plaintiff and 26 similarly situated employees all overtime wages owed for all overtime hours worked in violation 27 of Labor Code §510 and the applicable Wage Order; (c) failed to provide Plaintiff and similarly 28 situated employees with accurate wage statements in violation of Labor Code §226; and (d) failed PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR g DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 to pay Plaintiff and similarly situated former employees all wages owing and due at the end of 2 their employment with Defendants. 3 19. Defendants' foregoing wrongful acts constitute continuing and ongoing 4 unlawful activity in violation of the Labor Code and Business & Professions Code § 17200, et 5 seq. ("Unfair Competition Law"). Accordingly, Defendants should be enjoined from continuing 6 to violate the Labor Code and the Unfair Competition Law as set forth herein, including but not 7 limited to an injunction ordering Defendants to cease the unlawful business practices in violation 8 of the Labor Code and the Unfair Competition Law. 9 10 V. CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS 11 20. Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of herself and all others similarly 12 situated as a Class Action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §382. The First Class that 13 Plaintiff seeks to represent is the following: All persons who are or have been employed in 14 Califomia at any time from four years prior to the filing of this action through the date of the 15 Court's granting of class certification in this matter by Defendants and who were Territory 16 Managers and/or other sales positions and who were misclassified by Defendants as exempt 17 employees ("Exempt Sales Class Members"). The Second Class that Plaintiff seeks to represent is 18 the following: All persons who are or have been employed in Califomia at any time from four 19 years prior to the filing of this action through the date of the Court's granting of class certification 20 in this matter by Defendants and who were required at any time to work remotely and incurred 21 business expenses, but received no reimbursement, restitution or compensation for these business 22 expenses in violation of Labor Code section 2802 ("Labor Code section 2802 Class Members"). 23 21. Plaintiff further alleges Sub-Classes for the Exempt Sales Class Members 24 as follows: 25 (a) Overtime and Minimum Wage Sub-Class: All Exempt Sales Class 26 Members who do not qualify for any overtime exemption under Califomia law for 27 any pay period during the Class Period and who worked more than 8 hours a day 28 or more than 40 hours a week for any such pay period at any time from four years PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 7 DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 prior to the filing of this action through the date of the Court's granting of class 2 certification in this matter. 3 (b) Wage Statement Penalty Sub-Class: All Exempt Sales Class 4 Members who do not qualify for any overtime exemption under Califomia law for 5 any pay period at any time from one year prior to the filing of this action through 6 the date of the Court's granting of class certification in this matter. 7 (c) Waiting Time Penalty Sub-Class: All Exempt Sales Class Members 8 who are former employees and who do not qualify for any overtime exemption 9 under Califomia law at any time from four years prior to the filing of this action 10 through the date of the Court's granting of class certification in this matter. 11 22. This action has been brought and may be maintained as a class action under 12 Code of Civil Procedure §382 because there is a well-defined community of interest in the 13 litigation and the proposed class is easily ascertainable. 14 23. Numerosity: The potential members of the Classes as defined herein are 15 numerous and therefore joinder of all of the members of the Class is impracticable, especially 16 when employee tumover during the Class Period is taken into account. Defendants' employment 17 records applicable to the Class are required before an accurate number can be determined, but 18 Plaintiff is informed and believes that the potential members of the class are over 50 current and 19 former employees of Defendants. 20 24. Commonality: There are questions of law and fact that are common to 21 Plaintiff and the Class that predominate over any questions affecting only individual members of 22 the potential Class, including but not limited to the following: 23 (a) Whether Defendants improperly misclassified Plaintiff and the 24 Exempt Sales Class Members as exempt employees; 25 (b) Whether Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales 26 Class Members all wages eamed, including minimum and overtime wages; 27 (c) Whether Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff'and the Exempt 28 Sales Class Members with compliant itemized wage statements; PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR g DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 (d) Whether Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales 2 Class Members all wages that were owed to them at the time their employment with Defendants 3 terminated; and 4 (e) Whether Defendants required Plaintiff and the Labor Code section 5 2802 Class Members at any fime to work remotely and incurred business expenses, but received 6 no reimbursement, restitution or compensation for these business expenses in violation of Labor 7 Code secfion 2802. 8 25. Typicality: PlaintifFs Labor Code claims are typical of the Two Classes. 9 Plaintiffs misclassification claims are the same as the Exempt Sales Class Members. Further, 10 Plaintiffs Labor Code section 2802 claims are the same the Labor Code section 2802 Class 11 Members. 12 26. Adequacy of Representation: Plaintiff is a member of both Classes and 13 will fairly and adequately represent and protect the interests ofthe Classes. Plaintiffs interests 14 do not conflict with the interests of the Classes. Plaintiffs counsel is competent and experienced 15 in litigating wage and hour class actions and will devote sufficient time and resources to the case 16 and adequately represent the interests of both Classes. 17 27. Superiority: A class action is superior to other available mezms for the fair 18 and efficient adjudication of the instant controversy since individual joinder of all members of the 19 class is impracticable. Class action treatment will permit a larger number of similarly situated 20 persons to prosecute their common claims in a single forum simultaneously, efficiently, and 21 without the unnecessary duplication of effort and expense that numerous individual actions would 22 create. Further, as damages suffered by each individual member of the class may be relatively 23 small, the expenses and burden of the individual litigation would make it difficult or impossible 24 for individual members of the Class to redress the wrongs done to them, and an important public 25 interest will be served by addressing the matter as a Class Action. The cost to the court system of 26 adjudication of such individualized litigation would be substantial. Individualized litigation 27 would also present the potential for inconsistent or contradictory judgments. 28 PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 9 DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 VI. CAUSES OF ACTION 2 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FAILURE TO REIMBURSE FOR BUSINESS EXPENSES 3 (BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of the Labor Code section 2802 Class 4 Members, AGAINST A L L DEFENDANTS) 5 28. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate herein by reference the allegations 6 contained in Paragraphs 2, 4 through 13, and 20 through 27 of the Complaint as though fiilly set 7 forth herein. 8 29. Defendants passed on and avoided their own business operating expenses 9 by requiring Plaintiff and the Labor Code section 2802 Class Members to work remotely and 10 incur business expenses, and failing to provide to Plaintiff and the Labor Code section 2802 Class 11 Members any reimbursement, restitution or compensation for these business expenses. 12 Defendants' actions as described herein violate Labor Code §2802. 13 30. Plaintiff and the Labor Code section 2802 Class Members are entitled to 14 compensation, restitution and/or reimbursement of all such expenses and other relief, including 15 recovery of interest, attorneys' fees and costs of suit. 16 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 17 „ FAILURE TO PAY FOR ALL HOURS WORKED - MINIMUM 18 WAGES 1^ (BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of the Exempt Sales Class Members, AGAINST A L L DEFENDANTS) 20 31. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations 21 contained in Paragraphs 1, 4 through 10, 14, 17, 18 and 20 through 27 of the Complaint as though 22 fiilly set forth herein. 23 32. Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class Members have suffered unpaid 24 minimum wages, as Defendants have failed to pay Plaintiff and the Class for all hours worked, 25 instead paying Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class Members a salary without regard to the 26 number of hours worked. 27 33. Califomia Labor Code §1197 provides that "[t]he minimum wage for 28 PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 1Q DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 employees fixed by the Commission is the minimum wage to be paid to employees, and payment 2 of less than the minimum so fixed is unlawful. 3 34. The applicable minimum wage fixed by the commission for employees 4 such as Plaintiff is found in section 4(A) of the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage 5 Order and Labor Code §1182.12. 6 35. The minimum wage provisions of the Califomia Labor Code are 7 enforceable by private action pursuant to Labor Code § 1194(a), which states: 8 "Notwithstanding any agreement to work for a lesser wage, any employee receiving less than the legal minimum wage or the legal overtime 9 compensation applicable to the employee is entitled to recover in a civil action the unpaid balance of the ftill amount of the minimum wage or 10 overtime compensation, including interest thereon, reasonable attomey's fees, and costs of suit. 11 36. As described in Califomia Labor Code §§1185 and 1194.2, any such action 12 incorporates the applicable Wage Order of the Industrial Welfare Commission. 13 37. Califomia Labor Code § 1194.2 also provides for the following remedies: 14 .. "In any action ... under Section ... 1194 ... to recover wages because of the payment of a wage less than the minimum wage fixed by an order of the commission, an employee shall be entitled to recover liquidated 16 damages in an amount equal to the wages unlawfully unpaid and interest thereon." 17 38. Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class Members therefore are entitled to 18 recover their unpaid minimum wages and liquidated damages in an amount equal to the minimum 19 wages unlawfully unpaid, and interest thereon. 20 39. As a result of Defendants' unlawful actions. Plaintiff has been required to 21 retain an attomey and to incur attomey's fees and costs in pursuit of this cause of action. Plaintiff 22 is entitled to recover her reasonable attomey's fees and costs incurred herein pursuant to Labor 23 Code section 1194. 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR ]1 DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE REUEF 1 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 2 FAILURE TO PAY FOR ALL HOURS WORKED - OVERTIME WAGES 3 (BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of the Exempt Sales Class Members, 4 AGAINST A L L DEFENDANTS) 5 40. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations 6 contained in Paragraphs 1, 4 through 10, 14, 17, 18, and 20 through 27 of the Complaint as 7 though fully set forth herein. 8 41. Califomia Labor Code §510(a) provides, in pertinent part, as 9 follows: 10 "Eight hours of labor constitutes a day's work. Any work in excess of eight hours in one workday and any work in excess of 40 hours in any one 11 workweek and the first eight hours worked on the seventh day of work in any one workweek shall be compensated at the rate of no less than one and 12 one-half times the regular rate of pay for an employee. Any work in excess of 12 hours in one day shall be compensated at the rate of no less than 13 twice the regular rate of pay for an employee. In addition, any work in excess of eight hours on any seventh day of a workweek shall be 14 compensated at the rate of no less than twice the regular rate of pay of an employee. 15 42. Section 3 of the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order, 16 which at all times mentioned herein govemed the employment of Plaintiff with Defendants, 17 provides in pertinent part: 18 "Daily Overtime - General Provisions 19 (1) The following overtime provisions are applicable to employees 18 20 years of age or over and to employees 16 or 17 years of age who are not required by law to attend school and are not otherwise prohibited by law 21 from engaging in the subject work. Such employees shall not be employed more than eight (8) hours in any workday or more than 40 hours in any 22 workweek unless the employee receives one and one-half (1-1/2) times such employee's regular rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 hours in 23 the workweek. Eight (8) hours of labor constitutes a day's work. Employment beyond eight (8) hours in any workday or more than six (6) 24 days in any workweek is permissible provided the employee is compensated for such overtime at not less than: 25 (a) One and one-half (11/2) times the employee's regular rate of pay for 26 all hours worked in excess of eight (8) hours up to and including 12 hours in any workday, and for the first eight (8) hours worked on the seventh 27 (7th) consecutive day of work in a workweek; and 28 PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR J2 DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 (b) Double the employee's regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 12 hours in any workday and for all hours worked in excess of 2 eight (8) hours on the seventh (7th) consecutive day of work in a workweek." 3 43. During all times mentioned herein. Defendants required, allowed, suffered, 4 and/or permitted Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class Members to work in excess of eight (8) 5 hours in one work day or forty (40) hours per week without being compensated at the applicable 6 overtime rate of pay in accordance with the provisions of Califomia Labor Code §510 and 7 Section 3 of the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order. 8 44. Defendants have failed to pay Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class 9 Members for all overtime wages owed, as required by law, including failing to pay Plaintiff and 10 the Exempt Sales Class Members overtime pay for work they performed in excess of forty (40) 11 hours per week and in excess of eight (8) hours per day. By failing to provide timely and proper 12 compensation, as alleged above. Defendants have knowingly, willfully and deliberately violated 13 and continue to violate the provisions of Labor Code sections 510 and 1194 and the applicable 14 Wage Order, without limitation. 15 45. During all relevant periods in this matter, Califomia overtime laws applied 16 to Defendants and provided that any work performed by an employee in excess of forty (40) 17 hours per workweek or eight (8) hours per day be compensated at one and one half times or two 18 times the employee's regular rate of pay. Defendants did not compensate Plaintiff and the 19 Exempt Sales Class Members for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours per workweek or 20 eight (8) hours per workday and/or did not compensate Plaintiff and Exempt Sales Class 21 Members at the applicable overtime rate of pay. Thus, Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class 22 Members are entitled to recover their unpaid overtime compensation. 23 46. As a result of Defendants' unlawful actions. Plaintiff has been required to 24 retain an attomey and to incur attomey's fees and costs in pursuit of this cause of action. Plaintiff 25 is entitled to recover her reasonable attomey's fees and costs incurred herein pursuant to Labor 26 Code section 1194. 27 /// 28 PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 13 DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION FAILURE TO FURNISH ACCURATE ITEMIZED WAGE STATEMENTS 2 (BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of the Exempt Sales Class Members, 3 AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS) 4 47. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations 5 contained in Paragraphs 1, 4 through 10, 14, 15, 17, 18 and 20 through 27 of the Complaint as 6 though fully set forth herein. 7 48. Defendants knowingly and intentionally fumished Plaintiff and the 8 Exempt Sales Class Members with inaccurate and false itemized statements as described herein, 9 as required by Labor Code §226, and the applicable Wage Order and Califomia Regulations. 10 49. Pursuant to Labor Code §226, Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class 11 Members are entitled to recover the greater of all actual damages or fifty dollars ($50) for the 12 initial pay period in which a violation occurs and one hundred dollars ($100) per employee for 13 each violation in a subsequent pay period, not to exceed an aggregate penalty of four thousand 14 dollars ($4,000) each. 15 50. As a result of Defendants' unlawful actions. Plaintiff has been required to 16 retain an attomey and to incur attomey's fees and costs in pursuit of this cause of action. Plaintiff 17 is entitled to recover her reasonable attomey's fees and costs incurred herein pursuant to Labor 18 Code section 226. 19 FIFTH CAUSE QF ACTION FAILURE TO TIMELY PAY ALL WAGES DUE AT TERMINATION - WAITING TIME 20 PENALTIES 21 (BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of the Exempt Sales Class Members , AGAINST A L L DEFENDANTS) 22 51. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations 23 contained in Paragraphs 1, 4 through 10, 14, 16 through 18, 20 through 27 and 31 through 46 of 24 the Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 25 52. Califomia Labor Code §201 requires an employer who discharges an 26 employee to pay compensation due and owing to said employee immediately upon discharge. 27 Labor Code §202 requires an employer to promptly pay compensation due and owing to said 28 PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR 14 DAMAGES AND INKJNCTIVE RELIEF 1 employee within seventy-two (72) hours of that employee's termination of employment by 2 resignation. Califomia Labor Code §203 provides that i f an employer willftilly fails to pay 3 compensation promptly upon discharge or resignation, as required under §§201 and 202, then the 4 employer is liable for waiting time penalties in the form of continued compensation for up to 5 thirty (30) work days. 6 53. Defendants willfully failed and refused, and continue to willfully fail and 7 refuse, to timely pay all compensation and wages due to Plaintiff and the Exempt Sales Class 8 Members upon the cessation of their employment, as required by Labor Code §§201-202. 9 54. As a result of Defendants' unlawful acts. Defendants are liable to Plaintiff 10 and the Exempt Sales Class Members who are no longer employed by Defendants for waiting 11 time penalties under Labor Code §203, together with interest thereon pursuant to Labor Code 12 section 218.6. 13 55. As a result of Defendants' unlawful actions. Plaintiff has been required to 14 retain an attomey and to incur attomey's fees and costs in pursuit of this cause of action. 15 Plaintiff is entitled to recover her reasonable attomey's fees and costs incurred herein pursuant to 16 Labor Code section 218.5. 17 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES 18 (BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of All Class Members, AGAINST ALL 19 DEFENDANTS) 20 56. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate herein by reference the allegations 21 contained in Paragraphs 1 through 55 of the Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 22 57. Defendants' foregoing wrongful acts in violation of the Labor Code 23 constitute continuing and ongoing unlawful activity prohibited by Business & Professions Code § 24 17200, et seq. ("the Unfair Competition Law") and justifies the issuance of an injunction, 25 restitution, and other equitable relief pursuant to Business & Professions Code § 17203. 26 58. Defendants' conduct described herein was directly in violation of 27 Califomia's wage and hour laws, and it constitutes and was intended to constitute imfair 28 competition and unlawful and unfair acts and practices within the meaning of the Unfair PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR (5 DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 Competition Law. 2 59. Through their wrongful and unlawful acts, as described herein. Defendants 3 have acted contrary to the public policy of this State. 4 60. Defendants have engaged in unlawful business acts and practices by 5 violating Califomia law including, but not limited to, the Labor Code, the applicable IWC Wage 6 Order, and other violation of law discussed herein. 7 61. As a result of their unlawful, unfair, and/or fraudulent acts. Defendants 8 have reaped and continues to reap unfair benefits and illegal profits at the expense of Plaintiff, the 9 Exempt Sales Class Members and the Labor Code section 2802 Class Members. 10 62. Therefore, under the provisions of the Unfair Competition Law, the Labor 11 Code, and the applicable IWC Wage Order, Defendants should be enjoined from this activity and 12 should provide restitution to Plaintiff, the Exempt Sales Class Members and the Labor Code 13 section 2802 Class Members for the wrongfully withheld wages, reimbursement restitution, 14 compensation and other benefits pursuant to Business and Professions Code §17203, in a sum 15 according to proof for the 4-year period preceding the filing of this Complaint up to and including 16 the present. 17 SEVENTH CAUSE QF ACTION CALIFORNU PRIVATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL ACT 18 (BY PLAINTIFF, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and the State of 19 California, AGAINST A L L DEFENDANTS) 20 63. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates herein by reference the allegations 21 contained in Paragraphs 1 through 55 of the Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 22 64. The Court has jurisdiction of this cause of action pursuant to Labor Code 23 §§2699,et seq. 24 65. Plaintiff is an "aggrieved employee" as defined under Labor Code 25 §2699(c), and thus has standing to bring this action on behalf of all Califomia Employees whose 26 rights under the Labor Code where violated by Defendants, as described herein, pursuant to Labor 27 Code §§2699(a) and 2699.3. 28 66. Labor Code §2699(a) provides: "Notwithstanding any other provision of PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 law, any provision of this code that provides for a civil penalty to be assessed and collected by the 2 Labor and Workforce Development Agency or any of its departments, divisions, commissions, 3 boards, agencies, or employees, for a violation of this code, may, as an altemative, be recovered 4 through a civil action brought by an aggrieved employee on behalf of herself or herself and other 5 current or former employees pursuant to the procedures specified in Section 2699.3." 6 67. Labor Code §2699(f) provides: "For all provisions of this code except 7 those for which a civil penalty is specifically provided, there is established a civil penalty for a 8 violation of these provisions, as follows:... (2) If, at the time of the alleged violation, the person 9 employs one or more employees, the civil penalty is one hundred dollars ($100) for each 10 aggrieved employee per pay period for the initial violation and two hundred dollars ($200) for 11 each aggrieved employee per pay period for each subsequent violation." 12 68. Defendant required Plaintiff, other Territory Managers and other sales 13 employees employed by Defendant in Califomia to incur business expenses by requiring them to 14 work at home offices as described herein without reimbursing them for said expenses or 15 compensating them for said use in violation of Labor Code §2802. Further, as a result of the 16 Pandemic, Defendant required other employees to incur business expenses by requiring them to 17 work at home offices as described herein without reimbursing them for said expenses or 18 compensating them for said use in violation of Labor Code §2802. 19 69. Califomia Labor Code §1197 provides that "[t]he minimum wage for 20 employees fixed by the Commission is the minimum wage to be paid to employees, and payment 21 of less than the minimum so fixed is unlawful." Plaintiff, other Territory Managers and other 22 sales employees imlawflilly labeled by Defendant as exempt were not paid at least minimum 23 wages for all hours worked as required by law as described herein. In failing and refusing to 24 provide timely and proper compensation. Defendant has knowingly, willfully and deliberately 25 violated and continues to violate the provisions of Labor Code §§ 1194, 1194.2, and 1197, and 26 the applicable Wage Order, without limitation. 27 70. At all relevant times herein. Defendant required, allowed, suffered and/or 28 permitted Plaintiff, and on information and belief other Territory Managers and other sales PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR \7 DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 employees unlawfully labeled by Defendant as exempt to work more than eight (8) hours per day 2 and/or forty (40) hours per week, but received no overtime compensation. In failing to provide 3 timely and proper overtime compensation at the correct overtime rate, as alleged above, 4 Defendant knowingly, willfully and deliberately violated the provisions of Labor Code §§510 5 and 1194. 6 71. Defendant knowingly and intentionally failed to fiimish Plaintiff, and on 7 information and belief other Territory Managers and other sales employees unlawfully labeled by 8 Defendant as exempt with accurate itemized wage statements, as required by Labor Code §226 9 and the applicable Wage Order, without limitation. As a result of Defendant Employer's unlawful 10 acts. Defendant is liable for the amounts provided by Labor Code §226, including attomey's fees 11 and costs. 12 72. Califomia Labor Code §201 requires an employer who discharges an 13 employee to pay all compensation due and owing to said employee immediately upon discharge. 14 Labor Code §202 requires an employer to promptly pay compensation due and owing to said 15 employee within seventy-two (72) hours of that employee's termination of employment by 16 resignation. Califomia Labor Code §203 provides that i f an employer willfully fails to pay 17 compensation promptly upon discharge or resignation, as required under §§201 and 202, then the 18 employer is liable for waiting time penalties in the form of continued compensation for up to 19 thirty (30) work days. Defendant willfully failed and refused, and continue to willfully fail and 20 refuse to timely pay all compensation and wages due to Plaintiff similarly situated former 21 Territory Managers and other sales employees upon the cessation of their employment, as 22 required by Labor Code § §201 -203. 23 73. Plaintiff has suffered an injury in fact and lost money or property as a 24 result of the aforementioned violations by Defendants. Plaintiff is informed and believes and 25 thereon alleges that other current and former similarly situated Califomia Employees, as describe 26 ed herein, also suffered injury as a result of the violations. 27 74. As a result. Plaintiff seeks civil penalties as provided under applicable 28 Labor Code sections for violations of the Labor Code alleged herein pursuant to Labor PLAINTIFF'S CLASS ACTION AND PAGA COMPLAINT FOR lg DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 Code§2699(a). To the extent that any violation alleged herein does not carry a penalty, Plaintiff 2 seeks civil penalties pursuant to Labor Code §2699(f) for Plaintiff and other current and former 3 similarly situated Califomia Employees for violations of those sections. 4 75. Plaintiff seeks penalties on behalf of herself, other current and former 5 similarly situated Califomia Employees of Defendants, and the State, as provided by Labor Code 6 §2699(i). Affected employees are numerous, and it would be impracticable to bring all the 7 affected co-employees before the Court. 8 76. Plaintiffs PAGA claim does not require Class Certification. Plaintiff does 9 not need a Court Order authorizing the representation of the class for this cause of action. 10 77. Plaintiff believes that Defendant violated numerous provisions of the 11 Califomia Labor Code and applicable Wage Order, including without limitation: Labor Code 12 §§201, 202, 226, 510, 1194, 1194.2, 1197, and 2802. As a resuh of these violations, and under 13 the provisions of PAGA, Plaintiff, on behalf of herself, other similarly situated employees, and 14 the State, will seek penalties against Defendant under and without limitation to: Labor Code §§ 15 226.3,256, 558, 1197.1, and/or 2699(f). 16 78. For instance, by way of illustration and without limitation. Plaintiff will 17 seek the following civil penalties against Defendant for Plaintiff, the State and each aggrieved 18 employee: 19 a. Plaintiff seeks civil penalties under Labor Code §2699(f) for Defendant's 20 failure to reimburse business expenses in violation of Labor Code §2802; 21 b. Plaintiff seeks civil penalties