Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-03399/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-03399-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Bay Area Rapid Transit District
Defendant
Jodi Brunker
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

77726.1

[PROPOSED] ORDER FOR CONDITIONAL BRUNKER, et al. v. SF BART DISTRICT

CERTIFICATION AND NOTIFICATION 1 Case No 3:16-cv-03399-HSG

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case No. 3:16-cv-03399-HSG

ORDER FOR CONDITIONAL 

CERTIFICATION OF FLSA 

COLLECTIVE ACTION AND 

NOTIFICATION TO AFFECTED 

INDIVIDUALS

JODI BRUNKER, et al., on behalf of 

herself and all similarly situated individuals,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID 

TRANSIT DISTRICT,

 Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Having considered the parties’ Stipulation for Conditional Certification of FLSA 

Collective Action and Notification to Affected Individuals and the proposed Notice attached 

thereto, and finding that good cause exists to issue and order pursuant to said stipulation,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. This action satisfies the requirements for conditional certification as a "Collective 

Action" under the Federal Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The questions of law and fact common 

to the members of the class predominate over questions relevant only to individual members of 

Case 4:16-cv-03399-HSG Document 32 Filed 09/29/16 Page 1 of 3
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

77726.1

[PROPOSED] ORDER FOR CONDITIONAL BRUNKER, et al. v. SF BART DISTRICT

CERTIFICATION AND NOTIFICATION 2 Case No 3:16-cv-03399-HSG

the collective class and class adjudication is superior to any other method of adjudication for the 

fair and efficient adjudication of this matter.

2. For purposes of conditional certification, the FLSA Collective Action Class shall 

consist of all current and former FLSA non-exempt employees of the Defendant who worked 

overtime and received cash payments in lieu of health benefits at any time since June 17, 2013.

3. This action is conditionally certified as a collective action under 29 USC § 216(b). 

Plaintiffs’ counsel, Mastagni Holstedt, APC, shall serve as counsel for the collective class. 

4. Notification of this action in the manner set forth in subsections (a) through (c) 

below is appropriate:

a. Notification shall be made by sending a “Notice of Action” in the form of 

the notice attached as Attachment B to the parties stipulation to all who worked overtime and 

received cash payments in lieu of health benefits at any time since June 17, 2013;

b. Defendant may administer the notification process, and will send notices 

by District email or if the employee does not have District email by mail with proof of service to 

the employee's last known address to all putative class members within sixty (60) days from the 

date of this order. Defendant shall copy Plaintiffs’ counsel on any notice emails and provide 

Plaintiffs’ counsel with copies the proof of service.

c. Defendant shall provide Plaintiffs’ counsel a list of all putative class 

members’ names, District email addresses, and phone number and if no longer employed by the 

District the employee's last known address within sixty (60) days. 

5. Any deadlines currently set in this case are hereby vacated, and all proceedings 

are stayed except the filing of consents to join and the issuance of this order granting conditional 

certification and authorizing notice pursuant to Hoffmann-La Roche v. Sperling, 493 U.S. 165 

(1989).

///

///

///

Case 4:16-cv-03399-HSG Document 32 Filed 09/29/16 Page 2 of 3
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

77726.1

[PROPOSED] ORDER FOR CONDITIONAL BRUNKER, et al. v. SF BART DISTRICT

CERTIFICATION AND NOTIFICATION 3 Case No 3:16-cv-03399-HSG

6. The parties shall use informal discovery and early settlement negotiations in an 

attempt to resolve this dispute promptly.

7. The parties are ordered to submit a joint status report to this Court detailing their 

efforts taken to resolve this dispute and the current status of the case within ninety (90) days

from the date of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED:

DATED: September 29, 2016 _________________________________

HONORABLE HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:16-cv-03399-HSG Document 32 Filed 09/29/16 Page 3 of 3