Espinal v. Sephora USA, Inc.

Background

Rosalba Espinal and Juan Rivera sued Sephora USA, Inc., individually and on behalf of a proposed class of similarly situated workers. They state that they performed manual labor for Sephora and were paid every other week rather than weekly. They seek liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, and pre- and post-judgment interest under Article 6, section 198 of the New York Labor Law.

Motion to Dismiss

Sephora moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). It argued that the plaintiffs had not alleged an injury sufficient to give them standing and that New York Labor Law section 191 does not create an express or implied private right of action.

The court had referred the motion to Magistrate Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein. He recommended denying Sephora’s motion. He concluded that the plaintiffs had alleged an injury sufficient for standing and that the New York Labor Law provides an express private right of action for violations of section 191. His recommendation relied in part on a First Department appellate decision recognizing such an action and on later federal district court decisions following or deferring to that ruling.

Court’s Review and Ruling

Because no party objected to the Report and Recommendation, Judge Engelmayer reviewed it for clear error. He found no facial error, adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety, and denied Sephora’s motion to dismiss. The court directed the Clerk to terminate the pending motions at docket numbers 19 and 21. The case will continue under Judge Gorenstein’s supervision.

This was a ruling on Sephora’s request to end the case at the pleading stage. It did not decide the ultimate merits of the plaintiffs’ claims for damages.