Microsoft &
Greenberg Traurig

Our talented and experienced litigators, together with our broad geographic platform and our commitment to diversity, position us to provide Microsoft with a team that delivers legal services in line with our shared goals.

Our recent class action experience includes the following matters:

• In Re: Pacquiao-Mayweather Boxing Match Pay-Per-View Litigation (Central District of California)
  Defended undefeated champ Floyd Mayweather and Mayweather Promotions LLC, obtaining dismissal of 26 putative class actions pending in an MDL.
• Lomeli, et al. v. Jackson Hewitt Inc. et al. (Central District of California)
  Currently defending putative class action fraud claims that a Jackson Hewitt franchisee in the LA-area city of South Gate manipulated Plaintiff’s tax returns to get a larger refund and retained a portion of the ill-gotten refund in fees.
• Major v. Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. (Ninth Circuit)
  Affirmance of an earlier GT win on summary judgment defeating a putative false advertising class action against longtime client Ocean Spray.
• Markman v. Whole Foods Market Inc. et al. (Western District of Texas)
  Obtained dismissal of a putative securities fraud class action targeting Whole Foods and six current and former executives over its overpricing scandal, finding that a twice-amended complaint made no credible allegation that the grocery giant now owned by Amazon.com intended to deceive shareholders.
• Allen et al. v. Fluor Corp. (Northern District of Texas)
  Obtained dismissal of a putative class action by contractors who claimed Fluor failed to pay overtime on a contract in Afghanistan, ruling the country’s labor code does not apply to foreign citizens without work permits.
• Thomas Martone v. Walter E. Robb, III, et al. (Fifth Circuit)
  A putative class of participants in the Whole Foods Market 401(k) plan brought this case in the Western District of Texas alleging that the fiduciary of the 401(k) plan failed to warn about the alleged manipulation of revenue through overweighing of products, causing the stock to be inflated. The matter presents a unique theory – that the fiduciary, once it allegedly learned of the alleged intentional overweighing of product, was obligated to purchase a hedging product to protect the investments by the employees in company stock. The trial court dismissed with prejudice. The case is now on appeal, has been argued, and the parties await the court’s decision.
• Eike et al. v. Allergan Inc. et al. (Seventh Circuit)
  Won a reversal of a district court ruling granting class certification to a group of glaucoma sufferers suing Allergan Inc. and other drug makers (including our client Alcon) over the size of their eyedrop dispensers.
• Zurbriggen et al. v. Twin Hill Acquisition Inc. (Northern District of Illinois)
  This case is one of four proposed class actions the Chicago office is defending, brought by American Airlines employees over a new batch of chemically treated uniforms manufactured by our client (a subsidiary of The Men’s Wearhouse) that has allegedly led to a “cascade of health problems” among flight attendants and pilots.
• In Re: 100% Grated Parmesan Cheese Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation (Northern District of Illinois)
  Obtained dismissal for Wal-Mart and other cheese makers and sellers in an MDL alleging that they deceived customers by labeling products containing “a nontrivial amount of cellulose” as “100% grated Parmesan cheese.”

Meet the Team

With 38 offices globally, GT is equipped to handle litigation matters that arise in key jurisdictions across the U.S. and abroad. The following jurisdictional capabilities reflect our discussion last week, and we would be happy to provide information about our capabilities in additional jurisdictions.

California

• Karin Bohmholdt
• Nina D. Boyajian
• Robert J. Herrington
• Jeff E. Scott

Illinois 

• Francis A. Citera
• Gretchen Miller

Texas 

• Gregory J. Casas
• Mary-Olga Lovett
• Bina Palnitkar
• Dale Wainwright

Additional:

• Hilarie Bass, Firm Co-President
• Lori Cohen, Global Litigation Practice Co-Chair

Our robust Labor & Employment Practice includes more than 150 attorneys around the globe, offering international organizations strategic and practical legal services that are focused on maximizing human resource potential. Our team's recent experience includes:

• Fortune 50 Retailer (Nationwide)
  We serve as national coordinating counsel for a Fortune 50 retailer in FLSA representations involving scores of pending collective actions. Our direct representations of the client include:
  • Defense of claim that defendant violated California law by classifying Asset Protection Managers as exempt employees. The case was removed from state court to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) and then obtained decision of United States District Court for the Central District of California denying class certification. The Ninth Circuit denied a petition to review this decision.
  • Defense in serial wage and hour lawsuits asserting that Company violated the FLSA and applicable state laws by forcing its employees to work off the clock and miss required meal and rest breaks. Cases culminated in one of the largest reported comprehensive global wage and hour settlements in history.
  • Defense in nationwide FLSA collective action challenging exempt classification of assistant managers. Conditional certification was denied.
    Obtained favorable settlement in nationwide and state class action alleging violations of Title VII and Equal Pay Act for past denial of same-sex spousal benefits.

• Taylor v. W. Marine Products, Inc. (Northern District of California)
  Hybrid action alleging panoply of state and federal FLSA wage hour claims. Motion to certify class denied. Court held PAGA action cannot proceed in federal court absent class certification. Remaining action settled on very favorable terms shortly thereafter.

• Roth et al. v. Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center, et al. (Central District of California)
  Representation of hospital in putative class action involving meal and rest period and overtime claims (all nurses), with derivative claims for penalties, including PAGA claims. Removed from state court making new law along the way (see Roth et al. v. Hollywood Presbyterian Medical Center, et al., 720 F.3d 1121 (9th Cir. 2013)), then defeated the class.

• Genesis HealthCare Corp. v. Symczyk (U.S. Supreme Court)
  Representation in putative nationwide FLSA collective action that was ultimately resolved by the United States Supreme Court. In a 5-4 decision, the high court held that because Genesis had presented the named Plaintiff with an offer of judgment that admittedly covered all of her personal FLSA claims, and the named Plaintiff had no personal interest in representing putative, unnamed claimants, the case was moot and therefore properly dismissed by the district court.

• CVS Pharmacy, Inc. v. Romulus (First Circuit)
  Defeated class certification in a putative class action lawsuit filed by a group of CVS shift supervisors in Massachusetts alleging they were not paid for meal breaks during which they were required to stay on the work premises. This case involved a landmark pro-defendant interpretation of removal time limits under the Class Action Fairness Act.

• Baugh v. CVS Health et al. (Eastern District of Pennsylvania)
  Defense of a nationwide FLSA class action in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania contending that that manner in which CVS pays its exempt pharmacists defeats the FLSA’s salary-basis test. Court granted summary judgment, finding that Plaintiff had no proof to support a willful violation of the FLSA.

• Samantha Jones, et al. v. Abercrombie & Fitch Trading Co.; Benjamin Lagunas, et al. v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co., et al.; and Maria Garcia, et al. v. Hollister Co., et al. (Central District of California)
  In this trio of cases, dealing with an unsettled issue of law – whether the Wage Orders’ “reporting time pay” provision can be construed to address call-in scheduling, an issue currently on appeal in both the California Court of Appeal and the Ninth Circuit, and one with extremely high potential liability for his client, GT developed new arguments not previously advanced in the briefing of the issue before any court, and negotiated the Plaintiffs down from a nine figure settlement demand to a seven figure settlement – materially lower than settlements obtained in similar cases.

• Alma Bojorquez, et al. v. Abercrombie and Fitch Co., et al.; Alexander Brown, et al. v. Abercrombie and Fitch Co., et al. (Southern District of Ohio) 
  Took over representation of these two matters after class certification had been granted against prior defense counsel, aggressively litigated them with a view to decertifying the classes, and ultimately combined the matters and negotiated a nationwide settlement of both for pennies on the dollar.
     

Meet the Team

California

• Lindsay E. Hutner
• Mark D. Kemple
• Adil Khan
• James M. Nelson

Texas

• Shira R. Yoshor

Illinois  

• Tiffany S. Fordyce
• Michael D. Karpeles
• Gretchen N. Miller

Additional:

• Naomi G. Beer, Co-Chair – Global Labor & Employment
• James N. Boudreau, Co-Chair – Global Labor & Employment
• David Long-Daniels, Co-Chair – Global Labor & Employment