Mohammed v. American Airlines, Inc.
- Edward Davila
- 5:19-cv-01540
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Mohammed v. American Airlines, Judge Davila denied American’s motion for leave to seek reconsideration of an order remanding Mohammed’s wage-and-hour class action.
American Airlines’ request to seek reconsideration was denied; the opinion left the court’s earlier order granting Mohammed’s motion to remand in place.
What happened
In Hasim A. Mohammed v. American Airlines, Inc., the court had previously granted Mohammed’s motion to remand the case. American Airlines asked for permission to seek reconsideration, relying on a recent Ninth Circuit decision about proving the amount at stake in wage-and-hour class actions.
The court rejected that request. It said the cited decision was issued before the court’s earlier order, so it was not a later change in law that could support reconsideration. The court also said its earlier order did not conflict with that decision because American’s estimates were not supported by evidence or reasonable factual assumptions.
Judge Edward J. Davila denied American Airlines’ motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration.
The detailed version
- Mohammed v. American Airlines, Inc. · No. 5:19-cv-01540
- Edward Davila
- Dec. 9, 2019
Background
The court had granted Hasim A. Mohammed’s motion to remand in an order dated November 12, 2019. American Airlines then moved for leave, or permission, to file a motion asking the court to reconsider that order. American relied on the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Arias v. Residence Inn by Marriott, which addressed how a defendant removing a wage-and-hour class action may estimate the amount in controversy.
Court’s reasoning
The court held that Arias was not a proper basis for reconsideration because it was issued on September 3, 2019—before the court’s November 12 order. Under the cited local rule, it therefore was not a change in law occurring after the earlier order. The court also stated that American should have brought the decision to the court’s attention through a statement of recent decision.
The court further rejected American’s argument that the earlier remand order directly conflicted with Arias. Although a removing defendant may use reasonable assumptions, those assumptions must have a reasonable factual foundation. The court found that American had provided no evidence supporting its assumptions about the number of employees in the proposed class or the applicable hourly wage. Its damages estimate therefore was not supported by real evidence or reasonable assumptions based on that evidence.
Disposition
Judge Edward J. Davila denied American Airlines’ motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.