Blotzer v. L-3 Communications Corp.
District Court, D. Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
JENNIFER G. ZIPPS, District Judge.
Pending before the Court is a Motion to Quash filed by Plaintiffs on April 3, 2012. (Doc. 53.) Defendant filed a response to the Motion on April 9, 2012. (Doc. 57.) For the reasons stated herein, the Court will grant the Motion.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs’ Complaint alleges a single cause of action against Defendants: a claim for unpaid overtime pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. § 201, et *509seq. (“FLSA”). Defendant has served three of Plaintiff Blotzer’s former employers with subpoenas duces tecum seeking:
all employment records and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Sanchez v. City of Santa AnaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- William E. Brock, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor v. Some Seto, Individually and Doing Business as Tony of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
3Cited by11 opinions
- AmSurg Holdings Incorporated v. AnireddyDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2020
- Briggs v. Juul Labs Inc.District Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2024
- Daniels v. Wakefield & Associates, IncDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 2021
- Erwin v. OBI Seafoods LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2023
- In re: Subpoena Duces Tecum Served on GenembryomicsDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2026
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.