Orlando Alarcon and Junjie Tan v. Target Corporation

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California denied Plaintiffs’ motion to remand a putative California wage-and-hour class action against Target Corporation. The court held that Target established federal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act based on minimal diversity, a class size exceeding 100 members, and an amount in controversy of at least $8,678,400 from California Labor Code section 203 waiting-time penalties. The court found Target’s assumed 100% violation rate and use of an eight-hour workday to be reasonable and supported by the complaint and evidentiary declaration.

Holdings

1. Target established by a preponderance of the evidence that more than $5 million was in controversy because its calculation of at least $8,678,400 in section 203 waiting-time penalties rested on reasonable assumptions grounded in the complaint and supported by employee data.
2. Target reasonably could assume a 100 percent violation rate for the section 203 waiting-time-penalty calculation because the complaint alleged a uniform practice that caused employees to be paid less than the wages they were owed and did not limit the alleged failure to pay wages to only some class members.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Target established by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $5 million for purposes of CAFA jurisdiction.
2. Whether Target reasonably could assume a 100 percent violation rate and use an eight-hour workday in calculating potential California Labor Code section 203 waiting-time penalties.

Disposition

other