Summary
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied Plaintiff John Thornhill’s motion to remand a putative California wage-and-hour class action removed under the Class Action Fairness Act. The court held that Defendant McLane Foodservice, Inc. established by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded $5 million, relying on payroll data and reasonable assumptions regarding violation rates and attorneys’ fees. The court also denied Plaintiff’s request for judicial notice and granted Defendant’s request for judicial notice of California minimum wage rates.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Defendant established by a preponderance of the evidence that the amount in controversy exceeded CAFA's $5 million jurisdictional threshold.
- Whether Defendant could rely on a payroll and human-resources declaration without corroborating documents to support portions of its amount-in-controversy calculation.
- Whether Defendant's assumed violation rates and assumptions concerning waiting-time penalties were reasonably grounded in the complaint.
- Whether the court needed to determine a specific amount of attorneys' fees when the damages in controversy alone exceeded $5 million.
Holdings
- Defendant met its burden to establish that more than $5 million was in controversy, and the court therefore had subject matter jurisdiction under CAFA.
- An otherwise admissible declaration satisfying Rule 56 requirements may satisfy a defendant's evidentiary burden concerning the amount in controversy even without additional corroborating documentary evidence.
- Defendant's assumptions that certain Labor Code violations affected 20% of eligible shifts, that unreimbursed expenses averaged $20 per month subject to the same violation rate, and that terminated employees incurred the maximum 30-day waiting-time penalty were reasonable on the allegations presented.
- The court did not need to determine the amount of attorneys' fees in controversy because the damages estimate alone exceeded $5 million.
Key quotations
“Because Defendant has met its burden to show that more than $5 million is at stake in this case, the motion to remand is DENIED.” (at 1)
“Based on these authorities, an affidavit or declaration that meets the requirements of Rule 56 may satisfy a defendant’s burden of proof, regardless whether the defendant produces other documentary evidence.” (at 4)
“Rather, the defendant can meet its burden if its assumptions are reasonable, meaning that they have “some reasonable ground underlying them.”” (at 10)
“Given that Defendant has met its amount-in-controversy burden even without including attorneys’ fees, the Court need not guess.” (at 12)
Factual background
John Thornhill worked for McLane Foodservice in California as an hourly-paid, nonexempt employee from approximately November 2021 through July 2023. He alleged that McLane failed to pay minimum, straight-time, and overtime wages; provide meal and rest periods; timely pay final wages; furnish accurate wage statements; and reimburse business expenses. Thornhill brought the claims on behalf of a putative class of California hourly or nonexempt employees, and the complaint used general allegations that violations occurred "at times" with respect to "some of, but not necessarily all" class members. McLane relied on payroll, employment, and operational data and reasonable assumptions to estimate that more than $5 million was at stake.
Procedural history
The action was filed in Santa Clara County Superior Court. Defendant removed it to federal court on September 4, 2025, invoking CAFA jurisdiction. Plaintiff moved to remand, arguing that Defendant had not shown by a preponderance of the evidence that more than $5 million was in controversy. The district court denied the motion.