Legal Opinion

Jermaine Whitfield v. Levi Strauss & Co

District Court, N.D. California

Decided August 3, 2026No. 3:26-cv-01300Unknown

1Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JERMAINE WHITFIELD, Case No. 26-cv-01300-RFL Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR v. NOTICE TO FLSA COLLECTIVE LEVI STRAUSS & CO, Re: Dkt. No. 76 Defendant. Jermaine Whitfield alleges that his former employer, Levi Strauss & Co (“Levi’s”), underpaid him and his coworkers. He asserts claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and Nevada law. The FLSA allows for similarly situated plaintiffs to join a case and thereby form a collective action. This is a two-step process. First, a plaintiff seeks conditional certification of…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. McLaughlin v. Richland Shoe Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
  2. Daniel Campbell v. City of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
  3. Alvarez v. IBP, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
  4. Victor Rivera v. Peri & Sons Farms, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
  5. Fernandez v. Clean House, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2018

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API