Legal Opinion

Emmanuel Salinas, on behalf of himself and the Class Members v. Nestlé Purina Petcare Company

District Court, E.D. California

Decided April 15, 2026No. 1:21-cv-01140Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 EMMANUEL SALINAS, on behalf of Case No. 1:21-cv-01140 JLT CDB himself and the Class Members, 12 ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S Plaintiff, RENEWED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY 13 APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT 14 v. (Doc. 62) 15 NESTLÉ PURINA PETCARE COMPANY, 16 Defendant. 17 18 Emmanuel Salinas and Fred Johnson assert that Nestlé Purina PetCare Company1 failed to 19 comply with wage-and-hour laws arising under the California Labor Code, the California 20 Business & Professions Code, and the Fair Labor Standards Act.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. DukesSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
  3. General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Hansberry v. LeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  5. Staton v. Boeing Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003

8 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