Page 1 of 13

Kyle Kenworthy, et al. v. NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) No. 7:20-cv-111

Original Complaint—Collective Action

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MIDLAND-ODESSA DIVISION

KYLE KENWORTHY, CHAD HENSLEY,

STEPHEN MAKANJU, TED WILLIAMS and

MICHAEL SPERLING, Each Individually and

on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated

PLAINTIFFS

vs. No. 7:20-cv-111

NEXTIER OILFIELD SOLUTIONS, INC.,

NEXTIER COMPLETION SOLUTIONS, INC.,

and C&J ENERGY SERVICES, INC.

DEFENDANTS

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT—COLLECTIVE ACTION

COME NOW Plaintiffs Kyle Kenworthy, Chad Hensley, Stephen Makanju, Ted 

Williams and Michael Sperling (collectively “Plaintiffs”), each individually and on behalf 

of all others similarly situated, by and through their attorney Josh Sanford of Sanford 

Law Firm, PLLC, and for their Original Complaint—Collective Action against Defendant

NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., NexTier Completion Solutions, Inc., and C&J Energy 

Services, Inc. (collectively “Defendant” or “Defendants”), they state and allege as 

follows:

I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENTS

1. This is a collective action brought by Plaintiffs, each individually and on 

behalf of all other similarly situated employees of Defendant at any time within a threeyear period preceding the filing of this Complaint. 

2. Plaintiffs bring this action under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 

201, et seq. (“FLSA”), for declaratory judgment, monetary damages, liquidated 
Page 2 of 13

Kyle Kenworthy, et al. v. NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) No. 7:20-cv-111

Original Complaint—Collective Action

damages, prejudgment interest, and costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, as a 

result of Defendant’s failure to pay Plaintiffs and all others similarly situated lawful 

overtime compensation for hours in excess of forty (40) hours per week. 

3. Upon information and belief, for at least three (3) years prior to the filing of 

this Complaint, Defendant has willfully and intentionally committed violations of the 

FLSA as described, infra.

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. The United States District Court for the Western District of Texas has 

subject matter jurisdiction over this suit under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1331 

because this suit raises federal questions under the FLSA.

5. Defendant conducts business in this District and a substantial part of the 

events alleged herein occurred in this District.

6. Venue lies properly within this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) and

(c)(2), because the State of Texas has personal jurisdiction over Defendant, and 

Defendant therefore “resides” in Texas.

7. On information and belief, the payroll records and other documents related 

to the payroll practices that Plaintiffs challenge are located in this District.

III. THE PARTIES

8. Plaintiff Kyle Kenworthy (“Kenworthy”) is an individual and a citizen and 

resident of Tom Green County.

9. Plaintiff Chad Hensley (“Hensley”) is an individual and a citizen and 

resident of Chaves County, New Mexico.
Page 3 of 13

Kyle Kenworthy, et al. v. NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) No. 7:20-cv-111

Original Complaint—Collective Action

10. Plaintiff Stephen Makanju (“Makanju”) is an individual and a citizen and 

resident of Denton County.

11. Plaintiff Ted Williams (“Williams”) is an individual and a citizen and 

resident of Denton County.

12. Plaintiff Michael Sperling (“Sperling”) is an individual and resident of Bowie 

County.

15. Defendant NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., (“NexTier Oilfield”), is a foreign,

for-profit corporation registered to do business in Texas.

16. NexTier Oilfied’s registered agent for service is C T Corporation System,

at 1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201.

17. Defendant NexTier Completion Solutions, Inc. (“NexTier Completion”), is a 

foreign, for-profit corporation registered to do business in Texas. 

18. NexTier Completion’s registered agent for service is C T Corporation 

System, at 1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201.

19. Defendant C&J Energy Services, Inc. (“C&J”) is a foreign, for-profit 

corporation registered to do business in Texas. 

20. C&J’s registered agent for service is CSC-Lawyers Incorporating, at 211 

East 7th Street, Suite 620, Austin, Texas 78701.

21. Defendant maintains a website at https://nextierofs.com/.

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

22. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege all previous paragraphs of this Complaint as 

though fully incorporated herein.

23. Defendants have unified operational control and management, as well as 
Page 4 of 13

Kyle Kenworthy, et al. v. NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) No. 7:20-cv-111

Original Complaint—Collective Action

control over employees, including shared power to supervise, hire and fire, establish 

wages and wage policies and set schedules for their employees through unified 

management.

24. Upon information and belief, the revenue generated from Defendants’

entities is merged and managed in a unified manner.

25. As a result of this unified operation, control and management, through 

shared employees and ownership with the authority to establish wages and wage 

policy, Defendants operated as a single enterprise.

26. Defendant’s annual gross volume of sales made or business done was not 

less than $500,000.00 (exclusive of exercise taxes at the retail level that are separately 

stated) during each of the three calendar years preceding the filing of this Complaint.

27. Defendant was at all times relevant hereto Plaintiffs’ employer, as well as 

the employers of the members of the proposed collectives and are and have been 

engaged in the interstate commerce as that term is defined under the FLSA.

28. Defendant operates an oil and natural gas company with locations across 

the United States including several in Texas.

29. Upon information and belief, NexTier Oilfield and NexTier Solutions were

formed when C&J merged with another company. However, C&J maintains a separate 

filing with the Secretary of State, although its principal address is the same as that of 

the NexTier Defendants. 

30. Plaintiffs were hired by Defendant as salaried employees at Defendant’s 

location in Midland, during the three years preceding the filing of this Complaint.

31. At all times material herein, Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees 
Page 5 of 13

Kyle Kenworthy, et al. v. NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) No. 7:20-cv-111

Original Complaint—Collective Action

have been misclassified by Defendant as salaried employees and as exempt from the 

overtime requirements of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 207.

32. At all relevant times herein, Defendant directly hired Plaintiffs and similarly 

situated employees to work at its job sites, paid them wages and benefits, controlled 

their work schedules, duties, protocols, applications, assignments and employment 

conditions, and kept at least some records regarding her employment.

33. At all times material hereto, Plaintiffs were entitled to the rights, protection 

and benefits provided under the Fair Labor Standards Act 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq.

A. Plaintiff Kenworthy

34. Kenworthy worked for Defendant as an hourly employee from November 

of 2016 until July of 2018, and as a salaried Field Supervisor from July of 2018 to the 

present.

35. Defendant classified Kenworthy as exempt from the FLSA and did not pay 

him an overtime premium for all hours worked over forty (40) each week. 

36. Kenworthy regularly worked in excess of forty (40) hours per week.

37. As a Field Supervisor, Kenworthy’s primary job duty was supervising work 

crews at job sites.

38. Kenworthy did not hire or fire any other employee, and although 

Kenworthy sometimes made recommendations for hiring and firing, no particular weight 

was given to his recommendations.

39. Kenworthy did not manage the enterprise or any customarily recognized 

department or subdivision of the enterprise.

40. Kenworthy was misclassified by Defendant as exempt under the FLSA, 
Page 6 of 13

Kyle Kenworthy, et al. v. NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) No. 7:20-cv-111

Original Complaint—Collective Action

and was not paid an hourly rate of one and one-half times his regular rate of pay for 

every hour worked over forty (40) per week.

B. Plaintiffs Hensley, Makanju and Williams

41. Hensley worked for Defendant as a salaried Field Engineer from April of 

2018 until March of 2020.

42. Makanju worked for Defendant as a salaried Field Engineer from October

of 2018 to the present.

43. Williams worked for Defendant as a salaried Field Engineer from February

of 2018 until March of 2020.

44. Defendant classified Hensley, Makanju and Williams (collectively 

“Engineer Plaintiffs”) as exempt from the FLSA and did not pay them an overtime 

premium for all hours worked over forty (40) each week. 

45. Engineer Plaintiffs regularly worked in excess of forty (40) hours per week.

46. As Field Engineers, Engineer Plaintiffs’ primary job duties were completing 

calculations related to jobs, monitoring coil tubing piping and ensuring that it stayed 

within operable pressure and fatigue limits and performing post-job documentation for 

clients.

47. Engineer Plaintiffs did not hire or fire any other employee, and although 

they sometimes made recommendations for hiring and firing, no particular weight was 

given to their recommendations.

48. Engineer Plaintiffs did not manage the enterprise or any customarily 

recognized department or subdivision of the enterprise.

49. Engineer Plaintiffs were misclassified by Defendant as exempt under the 
Page 7 of 13

Kyle Kenworthy, et al. v. NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) No. 7:20-cv-111

Original Complaint—Collective Action

FLSA and were not paid an hourly rate of one and one-half times their regular rate of 

pay for every hour worked over forty (40) per week.

C. Plaintiff Sperling

50. Sperling worked as a salaried Specialist II from July of 2017 to January of 

2018, and as an hourly Specialist II from January of 2018 to June of 2019. 

51. When Defendants paid Sperling a salary, they classified him as exempt

from the FLSA and did not pay him an overtime premium for all hours worked over forty 

(40) each week. 

52. Sperling regularly worked in excess of forty (40) hours per week.

53. As a Specialist II, Sperling’s primary job duty was to run the pumps at job 

sites, as well as rigging up and rigging down.

54. Sperling did not hire or fire any other employee, and no particular weight 

was given to his recommendations to hire or fire.

55. Sperling did not manage the enterprise or any customarily recognized 

department or subdivision of the enterprise.

56. Sperling was misclassified by Defendant as exempt under the FLSA, and 

was not paid an hourly rate of one and one-half times his regular rate of pay for every 

hour worked over forty (40) per week

IV. REPRESENTATIVE ALLEGATIONS

57. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege all previous paragraphs of this Complaint as 

though fully incorporated in this section. 

58. At all relevant times, Plaintiffs and all others similarly situated have been 

entitled to the rights, protections and benefits provided by the FLSA.
Page 8 of 13

Kyle Kenworthy, et al. v. NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) No. 7:20-cv-111

Original Complaint—Collective Action

59. Plaintiffs bring their claims for relief for violation of the FLSA as a 

collective action pursuant to Section 16(b) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), on behalf of 

all persons who were, are, or will be employed by Defendant as similarly situated 

salaried employees at any time within the applicable statute of limitations period, who 

are entitled to payment of the following types of damages:

A. Overtime premiums for all hours worked in excess of forty per week; 

B. Liquidated damages; and 

C. The costs of this action, including attorney’s fees. 

60. Plaintiffs propose the following collective under the FLSA:

All salaried Field Supervisors, Field Engineers

and Specialists II in the past three years.

61. In conformity with the requirements of FLSA Section 16(b), each Plaintiff 

has filed or will soon file written a Consent to Join this lawsuit.

62. The relevant time period dates back three years from the date on which 

Plaintiffs’ Original Complaint—Collective Action was filed herein and continues forward 

through the date of judgment pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 255(a), except as set forth herein 

below.

63. The proposed FLSA collective members are similarly situated in that they 

share these traits:

64. They were misclassified as salaried employees;

65. They were not paid proper overtime wages as required by the FLSA;

66. They worked more than 40 hours in some weeks; and

67. They had substantially similar job duties, requirements, and pay 
Page 9 of 13

Kyle Kenworthy, et al. v. NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) No. 7:20-cv-111

Original Complaint—Collective Action

provisions. 

68. Plaintiffs are unable to state the exact number of the class but believe that 

there are approximately thirty (30) other employees who worked as Field Supervisors, 

Field Engineers or Specialists II, and were misclassified as salaried employees.

69. The names and physical and mailing addresses of the probable FLSA 

collective action plaintiffs are available from Defendant, and notice should be provided 

to the probable FLSA collective action plaintiffs via first class mail to their last known 

physical and mailing addresses as soon as possible.

70. The email addresses of many of the probable FLSA collective action 

plaintiffs are available from Defendant, and notice should be provided to the probable 

FLSA collective action plaintiffs via email to their last known email address as soon as 

possible.

71. Defendants knew or should have known that their actions violated the 

FLSA.

72. Defendant’s actions in denying overtime wages to Plaintiffs and all other 

similarly situated employees were intentional and constitute a willful violation of the 

FLSA.

V. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(Individual Claims for Violation of the FLSA)

73. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege all previous paragraphs of this Complaint as 

though fully incorporated in this section.

74. Plaintiffs assert this claim for damages and declaratory relief pursuant to 

the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq.
Page 10 of 13

Kyle Kenworthy, et al. v. NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) No. 7:20-cv-111

Original Complaint—Collective Action

75. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant has been Plaintiffs’

“employer” within the meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203.

76. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant has been, and continues

to be, an enterprise engaged in commerce within the meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 

203.

77. 29 U.S.C. §§ 206 and 207 require any enterprise engaged in commerce to

pay all employees a minimum wage for all hours worked up to forty (40) in one week

and to pay one and one-half times regular wages for all hours worked over forty (40) 

hours in a week, unless an employee meets certain exemption requirements of 29 

U.S.C. § 213 and all accompanying Department of Labor regulations.

78. At all times relevant times to this Complaint, Defendant misclassified 

Plaintiffs as exempt from the overtime requirements of the FLSA.

79. Despite the entitlement of Plaintiffs to overtime payments under the FLSA, 

Defendant failed to pay Plaintiffs an overtime rate of one and one-half times their

regular rate of pay for all hours worked over forty (40) in each week.

80. Defendant’s failure to pay Plaintiffs all overtime wages owed was willful.

81. By reason of the unlawful acts alleged herein, Defendant is liable to 

Plaintiffs for monetary damages, liquidated damages, and costs, including reasonable 

attorneys’ fees, for all violations that occurred within the three (3) years prior to the filing 

of this Complaint.

VII. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(Collective Action Claim for Violation of the FLSA)

82. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege all previous paragraphs of this Complaint as 
Page 11 of 13

Kyle Kenworthy, et al. v. NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) No. 7:20-cv-111

Original Complaint—Collective Action

though fully incorporated in this section.

83. Plaintiffs, each individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 

assert this claim for damages and declaratory relief pursuant to the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 

201, et seq.

84. At all times relevant times to this Complaint, Defendant has been, and 

continues to be, an “employer” of Plaintiffs and all those similarly situated within the 

meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203.

85. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant misclassified Plaintiffs 

and all others similarly situated as exempt from the overtime requirements of the FLSA.

86. Despite the entitlement of Plaintiffs and those similarly situated to overtime 

payments under the FLSA, Defendant failed to pay Plaintiffs and all those similarly 

situated an overtime rate of one and one-half times their regular rates of pay for all 

hours worked over forty (40) in each one-week period.

87. Defendant willfully failed to pay overtime wages to Plaintiffs and to others 

similarly situated.

88. By reason of the unlawful acts alleged herein, Defendant is liable to 

Plaintiffs and all those similarly situated for monetary damages, liquidated damages, 

and costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, for all violations that occurred within the 

three (3) years prior to the filing of this Complaint.

VIII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, premises considered, Plaintiffs Kyle Kenworthy, Chad Hensley, 

Stephen Makanju, Ted Williams and Michael Sperling, each individually and on behalf 

of all others similarly situated, respectfully pray as follows:
Page 12 of 13

Kyle Kenworthy, et al. v. NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) No. 7:20-cv-111

Original Complaint—Collective Action

A. That Defendant be summoned to appear and answer this Complaint; 

B. That Defendant be required to account to Plaintiffs, the collective

members, and the Court for all monies paid to Plaintiffs and the collective members;

C. A declaratory judgment that Defendant’s practices alleged herein violate 

the FLSA;

D. Certification of, and proper notice to, together with an opportunity to 

participate in the litigation, the classes of all qualifying current and former employees;

E. Judgment for damages for all unpaid overtime wage compensation owed

under the FLSA;

F. Judgment for liquidated damages pursuant to the FLSA;

G. An order directing Defendant to pay Plaintiffs and members of the 

collectives prejudgment interest, reasonable attorney’s fees and all costs connected 

with this action;

H. For a reasonable attorney’s fee, costs, and pre-judgment interest; and 

I. Such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper. 
Page 13 of 13

Kyle Kenworthy, et al. v. NexTier Oilfield Solutions, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) No. 7:20-cv-111

Original Complaint—Collective Action

Respectfully submitted,

KYLE KENWORTHY, CHAD HENSLEY,

STEPHEN MAKANJU, TED WILLIAMS

and MICHAEL SPERLING, Each 

Individually and on Behalf of All 

Others Similarly Situated, PLAINTIFFS

SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC

One Financial Center

650 South Shackleford, Suite 411

Little Rock, Arkansas 72211

Telephone: (501) 221-0088

Facsimile: (888) 787-2040

/s/ Josh Sanford_____

Josh Sanford

Tex. Bar No. 24077858

josh@sanfordlawfirm.com