TOSTRUD LAW GROUP, P.C.

1925 CENTURY PARK EAST

SUITE 2100

LOS ANGELES, CA 90067

TEL: 310.278.2600

FAX: 310.278.2640

WWW.TOSTRUDLAW.COM

FIRM RESUME

Tostrud Law Group, P.C was founded in 2011 with offices in Los Angeles and Minneapolis. 

We have a diversified legal practice, successfully representing plaintiffs in the areas of 

personal injury, securities and financial fraud, employment discrimination, unlawful 

employment practices including wage and hour disputes, product defect, consumer protection, 

antitrust and intellectual property, False Claims Act, and human rights. Our clients include 

individuals, classes or groups of persons, businesses, and public and private entities.

FIRM BIOGRAPHY:

JON A. TOSTRUD, Admitted to practice in the State of California and the State of 

Minnesota; U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California; U.S. District Court, Southern 

District of California; U.S. District Court, Northern District of California; U.S. District Court, 

Central District of California; Education: William Mitchell College of Law; Memberships: 

State Bar of California; State Bar of Minnesota. 

ANTHONY M. CARTER, Admitted to practice in the Commonwealth of Virginia; U.S. 

District Court, Eastern District of Virginia; U.S. District Court, Western District of Virginia; 

U.S. District Court, District of North Dakota; Education: James E. Rogers College of Law at 

the University of Arizona; Memberships: State Bar of Virginia.

SETTLED CASES

a. Juan Jordan, et al. v. Meridian Bank, et al., No. 17-cv-5251 (United States District 

Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. served as cocounsel in this class action on behalf of inside sales loan officers who were employed by 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 39-1 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:540
2

Defendant Meridian Bank. Plaintiffs alleged Defendants violated the Fair Labor 

Standards Act and state labor laws by misclassifying them as exempt from receiving 

overtime pay and by failing to compensate them at the federally-mandated minimum 

wage. On March 19, 2019, the court granted conditional certification in part for those 

loan officers who were denied overtime wages for all time worked in excess of 40 hours 

per workweek. On April 3, 2019, the court approved the parties’ form of notice to be 

distributed to the putative class. On September 30, 2019, the court issued an order granting 

preliminary approval of settlement of the case.

b. Grahl v. Circle K Stores, Inc., No. 2:14-cv-305 (United States District Court for the 

District of Nevada). Tostrud Law Group, P.C., served as co-counsel for a nationwide 

class of Store Managers employed by defendant Circle K Stores. Plaintiffs alleged Circle 

K Stores knowingly misclassified its Store Managers as exempt employees and failed to 

properly pay them the required minimum and overtime wages. On August 26, 2015, the 

court granted Plaintiff’s motion for conditional certification and agreed the case should 

proceed as a national class action. On December 21, 2018, the court preliminarily 

approved the parties’ settlement of claims. On April 8, 2019, the parties received final 

approval of the $8.25 million settlement for more than 1,200 current and former store 

mangers who joined the case seeking to recover unpaid wages.

c. Granados v. County of Los Angeles, No. BC361470 (Superior Court for the County of 

Los Angeles). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. served as co-counsel in this class action for the 

improper collection of telephone user taxes (“TUT”) on behalf of all individuals and 

businesses in the unincorporated areas of the County of Los Angeles who paid for 

residential landline, business landline, and/or mobile telephone services. The Hon. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 39-1 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 2 of 11 PageID #:541
3

Maren E. Nelson granted final approval of a $16.9 million settlement for refunds of the 

telephone taxes on October 29, 2018.

d. McWilliams v. City of Long Beach, No. BC361469 (Superior Court for the County of 

Los Angeles). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. served as co-counsel in this class action for the 

imposition and collection of a Utility Users Tax (“UUT”) on behalf of all individuals and 

businesses within the City of Long Beach who paid for residential landline, business 

landline, and/or mobile telephone services. In 2013, Plaintiffs won a landmark appeal in 

the California Supreme Court, allowing the case to proceed. The Hon. Maren E. Nelson 

granted final approval of a $16.6 million settlement for refunds of the telephone taxes on 

October 30, 2018.

e. Eaton v. Hamilton Group Funding, et al., No. 18-cv-21463 (United States District 

Court for the Southern District of Florida). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. served as co-counsel 

in this class action on behalf of inside sales loan officers who were employed by 

Defendant Hamilton Group Funding. Plaintiffs alleged Defendant violated the Fair Labor 

Standards Act by misclassifying them as exempt from receiving overtime pay and by 

failing to compensate them at the federally-mandated minimum wage. In March 2019, the 

parties entered into a settlement agreement for an undisclosed amount and are currently 

awaiting final approval from the court.

f. Luis Bautista, et al. v. Carl Karcher Enterprises, LLC, No. BC649777 (Superior Court 

of California, County of Los Angeles). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. served as co-counsel in 

a class action lawsuit for employees who worked for Carl’s Jr. restaurants. Plaintiffs 

alleged that Carl’s Jr.’s parent company, CKE, colluded with its franchisees to suppress 

the wages of the restaurant-based managers through a “no hire” agreement that expressly 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 39-1 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 3 of 11 PageID #:542
4

forbids franchises from employing or seeking to employ any of the restaurant-based 

managers who work for other franchisees or for CKE directly. Tostrud Law Group, P.C. 

recovered damages on behalf of the individual named plaintiffs, and successfully 

negotiated to permanently enjoin Defendants from enforcing the “no hire” term in its 

franchise agreement with franchisees.

g. Small v. University Medical Center of Southern Nevada, No. 12-cv-395 (United States 

District Court for the State of Nevada). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. serves as co-counsel 

representing employees who allege defendant University Medical Center (“UMC”) failed 

to pay them properly for missed meal breaks under the Fair Labor Standards Act. After 

the court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for conditional certification on June 14, 2013, 

approximately 600 current and former UMC employees agreed to join the case. After a 

granting Plaintiffs’ motion to compel in July 2013, the court appointed a Special Master to 

oversee the discovery process. The Special Master ultimately made numerous factual 

findings in support of Rule 23 class certification and concluded in a 78-page Report and 

Recommendation that defendant UMC had failed to identify, preserve, search for, collect 

and process relevant evidence. Magistrate Judge Leen overruled Defendants’ objection on 

August 9, 2018 in a 123-page ruling. On May 29, 2019, the United States District Judge 

Andrew Gordon granted approval to a $4.25 million dollar settlement of the action.

h. Lane v. First National Bank of Layton, No. 01-15-0005-5682 (American Arbitration 

Association). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. helped secure a settlement for a group of former 

inside sales loan officers who worked for Respondent First National Bank of Layton 

(“Layton”) for alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Maryland state labor 

laws. Claimants received compensatory damages due to Layton’s misclassification of its 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 39-1 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 4 of 11 PageID #:543
5

inside loan officers as exempt employees and failure to properly pay these employees the 

required minimum and overtime wages.

i. Rocha, et al. v. Gateway Funding, No. 15-cv-00482 (United States District Court for the 

Eastern District of Pennsylvania). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. helped secure a seven figure 

settlement of behalf of a class of inside sales loan officers who worked for defendant 

Gateway Funding. Plaintiffs received compensatory damages due to Gateway Funding’s

misclassification of its inside loan officers as exempt employees and failure to properly 

pay these employees the required minimum and overtime wages. 

j. Ardon v. City of Los Angeles, No. BC363959 (Superior Court for the County of Los 

Angeles). Tostrud Law Group, P.C., helped secure a $92.5 million dollar settlement on 

behalf of millions of Los Angeles city residents and businesses who paid taxes for 

telephone services that were improperly collected by the city. In October 2016, the City 

of Los Angeles agreed to provide refunds of taxes collected for telephone services on 

behalf of consumers who paid telephone utility user taxes to the City of Los Angeles for 

residential landline, business landline, and mobile telephone services.

k. Struett v. Susquehanna, No. 5:15-cv-176 (United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Pennsylvania). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. helped secure a settlement on behalf 

of a Section 216(b) collective class and Rule 23 class of residential mortgage bankers for 

misclassification violations and failure to properly pay overtime wages.

l. Pomphrett, et al. v. American Home Bank, et al., No. 1:12-cv-10330 (United States 

District Court for the District of Massachusetts). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. helped achieve 

a seven figure settlement of behalf of a Section 216(b) collective class and Rule 23 class 

of several hundred former loan officers for the failure to pay overtime wages.

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 39-1 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 5 of 11 PageID #:544
6

m. Wyler –Wittenberg, et al. v. Metlife Home Loans, Inc, No. 2:12-cv-00366 (United 

States District Court for the Eastern District of New York). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. 

helped achieve a seven figure settlement of behalf of a Section 216(b) collective class and 

Rule 23 class of current and former loan officers for the failure to pay overtime wages.

n. Ord, et al. v. First National Bank of Pennsylvania and F.N.B. Corp., No. 12-cv-00766 

(United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania). Tostrud Law 

Group, P.C. helped achieve a seven figure settlement of behalf of a Rule 23 class of 

several hundred account holders at First National Bank of Pennsylvania who were 

improperly charged overdraft fees on their checking accounts.

o. Molyneux, et al. v. Securitas Security Services, Inc., No. 4:10-cv-588 (United States 

District Court for the Southern District of Iowa). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. helped achieve 

a six figure settlement of behalf of a Section 216(b) collective class and Rule 23 class of 

hundreds of hourly paid security officers for failure to pay for off-the-clock work.

p. Hansen, et al v. Per Mar Security Services, et al, No. 4:09-cv-00459 (United States 

District Court for the Southern District of Iowa). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. helped achieve 

a confidential settlement of behalf of a Section 216(b) collective class and Rule 23 class of 

hundreds of hourly paid security officers for back wages. 

CASE PROFILES

Current Cases

a. Springmeyer v. Marriott International, Inc., No. 20-cv-00867 (United States Court for 

the District of Maryland). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. serves as co-counsel seeking to 

represent a class of consumers whose personal information was stolen from Defendant 

Marriott International. Plaintiffs allege Marriott failed in its duty to protect its guests’ 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 39-1 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 6 of 11 PageID #:545
7

sensitive information by not implementing adequate and reasonable cyber-security 

procedures and protocols for its databases. Plaintiffs seek an injunction and award of 

damages as a result of Defendant’s negligent and unlawful actions.

b. In Re: Plaid Inc. Privacy Litigation, No. 20-cv-3056 (United States District Court for 

the Northern District of California). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. serves as co-counsel 

seeking to represent a class of individual users of the financial application, Venmo, 

created by Defendant Plaid Inc. Plaintiffs allege Defendant improperly collects the 

transactional history and other financial data of its app users without consent and sells this 

data to third parties. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief as well as an award of 

damages as a result of Defendants’ unlawful actions.

c. Angell Chevas, et al. v. California Baptist University, No.20STCV30833 (Superior 

Court of California, County of Los Angeles). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. serves as cocounsel seeking to represent a class of students attending California Baptist University 

who were deprived of the benefit of on-campus learning due to the cancellation of classes

due to COVID-19. Plaintiffs allege Defendant failed to issue tuition refunds despite 

Plaintiffs’ inability to receive on-campus instructions and access campus facilities. 

Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief and a return of monies wrongfully obtained for tuition and 

fees.

d. In Re: TikTok, Inc. Consumer Privacy Litigation, No. 20-cv-4699 (United States 

District Court for the Northern District of Illinois). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. serves as cocounsel seeking to represent a class of individual users of the social media platform, 

TikTok, created and administered by Defendants. Plaintiffs allege TikTok improperly 

scans and collects users’ biometric identifiers in violation of the state of Illinois’

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 39-1 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 7 of 11 PageID #:546
8

Biometric Information Privacy Act (“BIPA”). Plaintiffs seek an injunction and an award 

of statutory damages to all class members.

e. O’Garro v. City of Jersey City, No. 20-cv-5282 (United States District Court for the 

District of New Jersey). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. serves as co-counsel on behalf of

persons with mobility disabilities against Defendants Mayor Steven Fulop and the City of 

Jersey City. Plaintiffs are seeking declaratory and injunctive relief for Defendants’ failure 

to provide accessible pedestrian rights of way within the City of Jersey City in violation of 

Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

f. In Re: Pork Antitrust Litigation, No. 18-cv-1776 (United States District Court for the 

District of Minnesota). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. serves as co-counsel on behalf of 

indirect purchasers of pork products from defendant pork suppliers. Plaintiffs allege

defendants violated federal and state antitrust laws by conspiring to illegally fix, raise, and 

maintain the price of pork in order to secure massive profits. Plaintiffs are seeking

damages sustained by them as a result of Defendants’ unlawful behavior.

g. In Re: Generic Pharmaceuticals Pricing Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 2724 (United 

States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. 

was appointed to serve on the Steering Committee as counsel in a class action lawsuit

seeking to represent thousands of independent pharmacies against several defendant 

generic drug manufacturers. Plaintiffs allege these drug manufacturers violated federal and 

state antitrust laws. Plaintiffs seek damages sustained by them as a result of Defendants’

unlawful behavior and an award of statutory damages to all class members.

h. In Re EKSO Bionics Holding Corp. Derivative Litigation, No. 18-cv-1348 (United 

States District Court for the Northern District of California). Tostrud Law Group, P.C. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 39-1 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 8 of 11 PageID #:547
9

serves as liaison counsel in this shareholder derivative action for the benefit of 

LendingClub shareholders who were damaged by, among other things, certain of 

LendingClub’s officers and directors who made false and misleading statements and 

representations about the company’s financial condition and future business prospects. 

Plaintiffs seek damages sustained by them as a result of Defendants’ breach of fiduciary 

duties owed to their company.

i. Engquist, et al. v. City of Los Angeles No. BC591331 (Superior Court of California, 

County of Los Angeles). Tostrud Law Group, P.C., serves as co-counsel for a class of 

taxpayers who reside in the City of Los Angeles who paid taxes for gas services that were

improperly collected by the City. Tostrud Law Group, P.C. is seeking refunds of taxes

collected for gas services on behalf of consumers who paid the City Gas User Tax 

(“GUT”) improperly collected by the City of Los Angeles. On May 13, 2019, Judge 

Buckley certified the case as a class action and a trial date has been set for June 1, 2020.

j. Starr v. City of Oxnard, No. 56-2018-00510828 (Superior Court, County of Ventura). 

Tostrud Law Group, P.C. serves as co-counsel representing plaintiffs against the City of 

Oxnard alleging improper collection of wastewater sewer fees. Plaintiffs claim that sewer 

rates billed to residents following the passage of a ballot initiative “Measure M”, which 

sought to curb increases in sewer wastewater fees, were illegal. Tostrud Law Group, P.C. 

seeks reimbursement of those wastewater charges and fees illegally collected. 

In addition, while with the firm of Cuneo Gilbert &. LaDuca, LLP, Mr. Tostrud headed the wage 

and hour practice and was appointed lead or co-lead counsel and achieved seven-figure and eightfigure settlements in several class and collective actions including:

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 39-1 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 9 of 11 PageID #:548
10

a. Nerland v. Caribou Coffee. Inc. et al., Civil No. 05-1847 (United States District

Court for the District of Minnesota). As co-lead class counsel, Cuneo Gilbert & 

LaDuca, LLP achieved a $2.7 million settlement on behalf of retail store managers 

improperly classified as exempt from overtime. The class action suit first filed in 2005, 

charged Caribou with wrongfully denying overtime pay due to current and former 

Caribou store managers. The lawsuit contended that Caribou misclassified its Store 

Manager position as exempt under the Minnesota and Federal Fair Labor Standards 

Acts to avoid paying overtime compensation. After nearly three years of litigation, the 

parties entered into a Settlement whereby, the Court granted final approval and Caribou 

Coffee Co. compensated participating class members.

b. Oliva, et al v. International Coffee and Tea. LLC d/b/a The Coffee Bean and Tea 

Leaf, et al., Case No. BC296435 (Superior Court of the State of California, County of 

Los Angeles). As co-lead class counsel, Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP achieved a 

seven-figure settlement on behalf of retail store managers improperly classified as 

exempt from overtime, as well as hourly-paid barristas who were not compensated for 

their meal and rest breaks.

c. Lagunas v. Cargill Meat Solutions Corp., Case No. 10-cv-00220 (United State 

District Court for the Southern District of Iowa) (Final approval - 1/27/11 Cuneo 

Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP served as co-lead counsel in six-figure class settlement on 

behalf of meat processing plant employees who were not properly paid for donning and 

doffing activities performed before their shifts, during meal breaks and after their shifts.

d. Wineland, et al v. Casey's General Stores, Inc., No. 08 CV 00020 (United States 

District Court for the Southern District of Iowa) (Final approval 10/22/09). Cuneo 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 39-1 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 10 of 11 PageID #:549
11

Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP along with co-counsel was appointed lead counsel and 

achieved a seven figure settlement on behalf of a Section 216(b) collective class and 

Rule 23 class of over 60,000 cooks and cashiers for unpaid wages, including time 

worked before and after their scheduled shifts and while off-the-clock.

e. Cedeno et al v. Home Mortgage Desk. Corp. et al., No. 08 CV 1168 (United States 

District Court for the Eastern District of New York) (Final approval - 6/15/10). Cuneo 

Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP along with co-counsel was appointed lead counsel and 

achieved a six figure settlement on behalf of a Section 216(b) collective class of loan 

officers deprived of overtime wages.

f. Jones, et al v. Casey's General Stores. Inc., No. 07 CV 400 (United States District 

Court for the Southern District of Iowa) (Final approval - 10/22/09). Cuneo Gilbert & 

LaDuca, LLP along with co-counsel was appointed lead counsel and achieved a seven 

figure settlement on behalf of a Section 216(b) collective class and Rule 23 class of 

more than 6,000 assistant store managers for unpaid wages, including time worked 

before and after their scheduled shifts and while off-the-clock.

In addition to the above representative cases, Tostrud Law Group, P.C. is currently 

prosecuting several other class and/or collective actions, including data breach and privacy cases, 

product liability and securities fraud class actions, and several antitrust cases against large 

companies. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 39-1 Filed: 09/08/20 Page 11 of 11 PageID #:550