No. 20-257

Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., et al. v. Maxcimo Scott, et al.

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2020-09-01
Status: Dismissed
Type: Paid
Amici (4)Relisted (5) Experienced Counsel
Tags: civil-procedure class-certification collective-action district-court employment-law fair-labor-standards-act material-question opt-in-plaintiffs similarly-situated
Key Terms:
Arbitration ERISA WageAndHour Privacy ClassAction JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2021-01-22 (distributed 5 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a district court may consider factors other than the presence of a single material question of law or fact common to a group of employees when assessing whether the employees are 'similarly situated' for purposes of the collective-action provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION PRESENTED The Fair Labor Standards Act creates a private right of action under which employees may bring suit for certain violations not just on their own behalf, but also collectively on behalf of “other employees similarly situated.” 29 U.S.C. 216(b). The question presented is: Whether a district court may consider factors other than the presence of a single material question of law or fact common to a group of employees when assessing whether the employees are “similarly situated” for purposes of the collective-action provision of the Fair Labor Standards Act. (1)

Docket Entries

2021-12-21
Petition Dismissed - Rule 46.
2021-12-17
Joint stipulation to dismiss the petition for a writ of certiorari pursuant to Rule 46.1 filed.
2021-01-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/22/2021.
2021-01-11
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/15/2021.
2021-01-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/8/2021.
2020-12-31
Joint motion to defer consideration of the petition for a writ of certiorari filed.
2020-12-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/11/2020.
2020-11-17
Reply of petitioners Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., et al. filed. (Distributed)
2020-11-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/4/2020.
2020-11-02
Brief of respondents Maxcimo Scott, et al. in opposition filed.
2020-10-01
Brief amicus curiae of The Wage & Hour Defense Institute filed.
2020-10-01
Brief amici curiae of DRI-The Voice of the Defense Bar, et al. filed.
2020-10-01
Brief amici curiae of The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. filed.
2020-10-01
Brief amici curiae of Retail Litigation Center, Inc., And Restaurant Law Center filed.
2020-09-16
Blanket Consent filed by Respondent, Maxcimo Scott, et al.
2020-09-15
Blanket Consent filed by Petitioner, Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., et al.
2020-09-15
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 2, 2020. See Rule 30.1.
2020-09-14
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 1, 2020 to October 31, 2020, submitted to The Clerk.
2020-08-28
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 1, 2020)

Attorneys

Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., et al.
Kannon K. ShanmugamPaul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Petitioner
Kannon K. ShanmugamPaul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, Petitioner
DRI-The Voice of the Defense Bar
Matthew T. NelsonWarner Norcross + Judd LLP, Amicus
Matthew T. NelsonWarner Norcross + Judd LLP, Amicus
Maxcimo Scott, et al.
Wayne N. OuttenOutten & Golden LLP, Respondent
Wayne N. OuttenOutten & Golden LLP, Respondent
Retail Litigation Center, Inc., And Restaurant Law Center
Paul DeCampEpstein, Becker & Green, P.C., Amicus
Paul DeCampEpstein, Becker & Green, P.C., Amicus
The Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America and The National Retail Federation
Scott A. KellerBaker Botts LLP, Amicus
Scott A. KellerBaker Botts LLP, Amicus
The Wage & Hour Defense Institute
Joseph George SchmittNilan Johnson Lewis PA, Amicus
Joseph George SchmittNilan Johnson Lewis PA, Amicus