Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

CROFT v. PROTOMOTIVE, INC., 3:12-CV-03102. (2013)

Court: District Court, W.D. Arkansas Number: infdco20130911632 Visitors: 13
Filed: Sep. 10, 2013
Latest Update: Sep. 10, 2013
Summary: ORDER P.K. HOLMES, III, Chief District Judge. On May 13, 2013, the Court conditionally certified this action a collective action under 29 U.S.C. 216(b) and authorized the issuance of notice and a consent to join form to potential class members (Doc. 38). Before the Court is Defendants' motion to decertify collective action (Doc. 44). Plaintiffs have filed a response (Doc. 46) stating that they do not oppose Defendants' motion to decertify. No potential class members consented to join this a
More

ORDER

P.K. HOLMES, III, Chief District Judge.

On May 13, 2013, the Court conditionally certified this action a collective action under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) and authorized the issuance of notice and a consent to join form to potential class members (Doc. 38). Before the Court is Defendants' motion to decertify collective action (Doc. 44). Plaintiffs have filed a response (Doc. 46) stating that they do not oppose Defendants' motion to decertify. No potential class members consented to join this action within the opt-in period, which expired on August 11, 2013. The Court finds it would be inappropriate to allow Plaintiffs' claims to proceed on a collective basis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' motion to decertify collective action (Doc. 44) is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action should be and is decertified as a collective action.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter shall proceed only upon the individual claims of Plaintiffs Donna Croft, Bobbie Hickman, and Benjamin Sutton, and discovery shall continue accordingly.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer