Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02945/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02945-6/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

VERDICT FORM

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

VERDICT FORM

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 36 Filed 02/23/16 Page 1 of 5
2

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

VERDICT FORM

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

VERDICT FORM

When answering the following questions and filling out this verdict form, please follow the 

directions provided throughout the form. Your answer to each question must be unanimous. 

Some of the questions contain legal terms that are defined and explained in detail in the jury 

instructions. Please refer to the jury instructions if you are unsure about the meaning or usage of 

any legal term that appears in the questions below.

We, the jury, unanimously agree to the answers to the following questions and return them 

under the instructions of this Court as our verdict in this case.

FINDINGS ON LIABILITY

1. Did Plaintiff Juan Carlos Martinez perform work for Defendants Trung Q. Le and 

Letech Manufacturing, Inc.?

Yes _____ No _____

If you answered “Yes,” then answer the next question. If you answered “No,” stop 

here, answer no further questions and proceed to page 5.

2. Did Mr. Martinez have an hourly wage rate of $10.00 per hour throughout his 

employment with Defendants?

Yes _____ No _____

Proceed to the next question.

3. Did Mr. Martinez work overtime hours?

Yes _____ No _____

If you answered “Yes,” then answer the next question. If you answered “No,” 

proceed to question 7.

4. Did Defendants know, or should Defendants have known, that Mr. Martinez had 

worked overtime hours?

Yes _____ No _____

If you answered “Yes,” then answer the next question. If you answered “No,” 

proceed to question 7.

5. Was Mr. Martinez paid at a rate lower than the legal overtime compensation rate for 

any overtime hours that he worked for Defendants?

Yes _____ No _____

If you answered “Yes,” then answer the next question. If you answered “No,” 

proceed to question 7.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 36 Filed 02/23/16 Page 2 of 5
3

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

VERDICT FORM

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. Did Defendants intentionally fail to pay Mr. Martinez overtime wages?

Yes _____ No _____

Proceed to the next question.

7. Did Mr. Martinez’ employment with Defendants end on September 6, 2013?

Yes _____ No _____

If you answered “Yes,” then answer the next question. If you answered “No,”

proceed to question 10.

8. Did Defendants fail to pay the full amount of wages due to Mr. Martinez by October 6, 

2013?

Yes _____ No _____

If you answered “Yes,” then answer the next question. If you answered “No,” 

proceed to question 10.

9. Did Defendants willfully fail to pay these wages?

Yes _____ No _____

Proceed to the next question.

10. Did Defendants engage in an unfair business practice by violating state and federal 

wage and hour laws?

Yes _____ No _____

Proceed to the next question.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 36 Filed 02/23/16 Page 3 of 5
4

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

VERDICT FORM

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

FINDINGS ON DAMAGES

11. What are Mr. Martinez’ damages, if any?

$ _______________________ Overtime Wages Owed

Proceed to the next page.

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 36 Filed 02/23/16 Page 4 of 5
5

Case No. 14-cv-02945-PSG

VERDICT FORM

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

Have the presiding juror sign and date this form. 

Signed: 

Presiding Juror

Dated:

After this verdict form has been signed and dated, notify the courtroom deputy that you are ready 

to present your verdict in the courtroom.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 23, 2016

_________________________________

PAUL S. GREWAL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:14-cv-02945-PSG Document 36 Filed 02/23/16 Page 5 of 5