Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02945/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02945-3/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 15:2(a) Fair Labor Standards Act

---

1

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JUAN CARLOS MARTINEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

TRUNG Q. LE, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY 

INSTRUCTIONS

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 33 Filed 02/23/16 Page 1 of 13
2

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

1. DUTY TO DELIBERATE

When you begin your deliberations, you should elect one member of the jury as your presiding 

juror. That person will preside over the deliberations and speak for you here in court.

You will then discuss the case with your fellow jurors to reach agreement if you can do so. Your 

verdict must be unanimous.

Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but you should do so only after you have 

considered all of the evidence, discussed it fully with the other jurors, and listened to the views of 

your fellow jurors.

Do not hesitate to change your opinion if the discussion persuades you that you should. Do not 

come to a decision simply because other jurors think it is right.

It is important that you attempt to reach a unanimous verdict but, of course, only if each of you 

can do so after having made your own conscientious decision. Do not change an honest belief 

about the weight and effect of the evidence simply to reach a verdict.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 33 Filed 02/23/16 Page 2 of 13
3

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

2. COMMUNICATION WITH COURT

If it becomes necessary during your deliberations to communicate with me, you may send a note 

through the court security officer, signed by your presiding juror or by one or more members of 

the jury. No member of the jury should ever attempt to communicate with me except by a signed 

writing; I will communicate with any member of the jury on anything concerning the case only in 

writing, or here in open court. If you send out a question, I will consult with the parties before 

answering it, which may take some time. You may continue your deliberations while waiting for 

the answer to any question. Remember that you are not to tell anyone—including me—how the 

jury stands, numerically or otherwise, until after you have reached a unanimous verdict or have 

been discharged. Do not disclose any vote count in any note to the court.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 33 Filed 02/23/16 Page 3 of 13
4

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

3. BURDEN OF PROOF—PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE

When a party has the burden of proof on any claim or affirmative defense by a preponderance of 

the evidence, it means you must be persuaded by the evidence that the claim or affirmative 

defense is more probably true than not true.

You should base your decision on all of the evidence, regardless of which party presented it.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 33 Filed 02/23/16 Page 4 of 13
5

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

4. DEMONSTRATIVE EVIDENCE

During the trial, materials have been shown to you to help explain testimony or other evidence in 

the case. Other materials have also been shown to you during the trial, but they have not been 

admitted into evidence. You will not be able to review them during your deliberations because 

they are not themselves evidence or proof of any facts. You may, however, consider the testimony 

given in connection with those materials.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 33 Filed 02/23/16 Page 5 of 13
6

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

5. SUMMARY OF CONTENTIONS

I will now summarize for you each side’s contentions in this case. I will then tell you what each 

side must prove to win on each of its contentions.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 33 Filed 02/23/16 Page 6 of 13
7

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

6. NONPAYMENT OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION—ESSENTIAL FACTUAL 

ELEMENTS

Plaintiff Juan Carlos Martinez claims that Defendants Trung Q. Le and Letech Manufacturing, Inc. 

owe overtime pay as required by state law.

To establish this claim, Mr. Martinez must prove all of the following:

1. That he performed work for Defendants;

2. That he worked overtime hours;

3. That Defendants knew or should have known that Mr. Martinez had worked overtime 

hours;

4. That Mr. Martinez was not paid for all overtime hours worked; and

5. The amount of overtime pay owed.

Under California law, overtime hours are defined as any hours worked in excess of 8 hours per 

day or 40 hours per week.

Overtime pay under California law is one and a half times the employee’s regular rate of pay for 

all hours worked in excess of 8 hours up to and including 12 hours in any workday, and double the 

employee’s regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 12 hours in any workday.

An employee is entitled to be paid the legal overtime pay rate even if he or she agrees to work for 

a lower rate.

Defendants deny this claim.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 33 Filed 02/23/16 Page 7 of 13
8

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

7. NONPAYMENT OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION—PROOF OF OVERTIME HOURS 

WORKED

State law requires California employers to keep payroll records showing the hours worked by and 

wages paid to employees.

If Defendants did not keep accurate records of the hours worked by Mr. Martinez, then he may 

prove the number of overtime hours worked by making a reasonable estimate of those hours.

In determining the amount of overtime hours worked, you may consider Mr. Martinez’ estimate of 

the number of overtime hours worked and any evidence presented by Defendants that Mr. 

Martinez’ estimate is unreasonable.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 33 Filed 02/23/16 Page 8 of 13
9

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

8. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES

Mr. Martinez claims that Defendants owe overtime pay under federal law as liquidated damages in 

addition to the overtime wages owed under state law.

To establish this claim, Mr. Martinez must prove all of the following:

1. That he performed work for Defendants;

2. That he worked overtime hours;

3. That Defendants knew or should have known that Mr. Martinez had worked overtime 

hours;

4. That Mr. Martinez was not paid for all overtime hours worked; and

5. That Defendants intentionally failed to pay Mr. Martinez overtime wages.

Under federal law, overtime hours are defined as any hours in excess of 40 hours per week.

The court will determine the amount of liquidated damages, if any.

Defendants deny this claim.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 33 Filed 02/23/16 Page 9 of 13
10

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

9. WAITING-TIME PENALTY FOR NONPAYMENT OF WAGES

If you decide that Mr. Martinez has proved his claim against Defendants for unpaid overtime 

wages, then Mr. Martinez may be entitled to receive an award of a civil penalty based on the 

number of days Defendant failed to pay his wages when due.

To recover the civil penalty, Mr. Martinez must prove all of the following:

1. The date on which his employment ended;

2. That Defendants failed to pay all wages due by that date;

3. Mr. Martinez’ daily wage rate at the time his employment with Defendants ended; and

4. That Defendants willfully failed to pay these wages.

The term “willfully” means that the employer intentionally failed or refused to pay the wages.

The court will determine the amount of waiting-time penalties, if any.

Defendants deny this claim.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 33 Filed 02/23/16 Page 10 of 13
11

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

10. FAILURE TO PROVIDE WAGE STATEMENTS

State law requires employers to provide employees with written periodic wage statements. The 

wage statements must set forth the dates of labor for which payment of wages is made, the total 

hours of work for the pay period, the gross and net wages paid, all deductions from those wages

and the name and address of the employee.

To establish this claim, Mr. Martinez must prove that he performed work for Defendants. If Mr. 

Martinez proves that he performed work for Defendants, Defendants must prove that they 

provided him with proper and compliant wage statements.

Employers who violate this law must pay a minimum of $50 for the initial pay period in which a 

violation occurs and $100 per employee for each violation in a subsequent pay period, not to 

exceed an aggregate penalty of $4,000.

Defendants deny this claim.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 33 Filed 02/23/16 Page 11 of 13
12

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

11. UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES

State law makes it unlawful for employers to engage in unfair business practices by violating state 

and federal wage and hour laws.

To establish this claim, Mr. Martinez must prove all of the following:

1. That he performed work for Defendants;

2. That he worked overtime hours; and

3. That he was not paid for all overtime hours worked.

Defendants deny this claim.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 33 Filed 02/23/16 Page 12 of 13
13

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

[PROPOSED] FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

12. RETURN OF VERDICT

A verdict form has been prepared for you. After you have reached unanimous agreement on a 

verdict, your presiding juror will fill in the form that has been given to you, sign and date it, and 

advise the court that you are ready to return to the courtroom.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 23, 2016

_________________________________

PAUL S. GREWAL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 33 Filed 02/23/16 Page 13 of 13