Plaintiffs brought a dual-filed FLSA collective action seeking to certify a class of several hundred workers, along with state law claims. The court denied Plaintiffs’ motion for FLSA certification, finding that the employees were not similarly-situated.
The court reasoned that the employees had not even submitted a modest showing of evidence to be certified as a class. Further, the court did not believe it was appropriate to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims where the state law issues predominated over the remaining federal claims.
The high ratio of state to federal claimants weighed against the court exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims. The court also concluded that no aspect of federal immigration law was an indispensable component of any state law claim.
