Coder et al v. M-I, LLC

Filing 30

ORDER AND REASONS DENYING AS MOOT 12 Motion to Sever. Signed by Judge Wendy B Vitter on 9/11/2019. (jeg)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ROBERT CODER, ET AL.

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

NO. 17-15074-WBV-JVM

M-I, LLC

SECTION: D (1)

ORDER AND REASONS
Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion to Sever.1 The Motion is opposed2 and
Defendant has filed a Reply.3 For the reasons that follow, the Motion is DENIED as
moot.
I.

Background

On December 6, 2017, Robert Coder, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Murray Alford, Craig Dawson, Michael Maloy, Robert Theiss and
Cory Veuleman (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed a Complaint in this Court, styled as a
collective action, seeking to recover unpaid overtime wages under the Fair Labor
Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq., from M-I, LLC d/b/a M-I Swaco
(“Defendant”). 4 The parties agree, however, that Plaintiffs have not moved for
conditional certification of a class.5 Nonetheless, Defendant filed the instant Motion
to Sever, 6 seeking an Order severing the claims of “nine (9) Plaintiffs and/or
R. Doc. 12.
R. Doc. 13.
3 R. Doc. 17.
4 R. Doc. 1.
5 See R. Doc. 12-1 at p.3, n.1; R. Doc. 13 at p. 2.
6 R. Doc. 13.
1
2

purported opt-ins: Robert Coder, Murray Alford, Craig Dawson, Michael Maloy,
Robert Theiss, Cory Vueleman, William Green, William McBee, and James Slack . . .
who have alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act(“FLSA”).7 According to
Defendant, “Plaintiffs’ claims should be severed into independent, separate lawsuits
and adjudicated separately at trial.” 8

Defendant notes, however, that, “While

Plaintiffs have styled this matter as a Collective Action, Plaintiffs have not moved for
conditional certification. William Green, William McBee, and James Slack have
purported to opt-in. (Rec. Doc. 42) (filed while consolidated with Bocage, Case No.
17-6124).”9
Plaintiffs and the purported opt-in plaintiffs, Green, McBee and Slack, oppose
the Motion, asserting that Defendant’s argument lacks merit and that the Motion
should be denied.10 Plaintiffs, Green, McBee and Slack assert that their claims are
sufficiently related to support joinder in a single proceeding and that they are
similarly situated for the purposes of conditional certification as a collective action.11
They readily admit, however, that “The plaintiffs have not yet filed a motion for
conditional class certification.”12
II.

Law and Analysis

Local Civil Rule 23.1 of the Eastern District of Louisiana requires a plaintiff to
move for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(1) within 91

R. Doc. 12-1 at p. 3.
Id.
9 Id. at n. 1.
10 R. Doc. 13.
11 Id. at pp. 4-5.
12 Id. at p. 2.
7
8

days after filing a complaint in a class action, unless the period is extended upon
motion for good cause and order by the Court. Although styled as a purported
collective action for unpaid overtime wages under the FLSA, there is no dispute in
this case that Plaintiffs have neither filed a motion for conditional class certification
nor moved for an extension of the time period in which to do so under the Local Rules.
Thus, there is no purported class in which Green, McBee and Slack could have opted
into in this matter.
Further, as Defendant points out, McBee, Green and Slack attempted to
become plaintiffs in this lawsuit during the brief period in which this matter was
consolidated with Bocage v. M-I, LLC, Civ. A. No. 17-6124-GGG-JVM (E.D. La.), when
Robert Coder filed a Notice of Filing Written Consent to Join as Plaintiffs in that
case.13 However, that pleading was marked “Deficient” by this Court as an “Improper
form of pleading,” and the Court further advised that, “A Motion to Amend must be
filed to add parties.”14 The deadline for Coder to correct the deficiency was July 13,
2018. The cases were deconsolidated on July 10, 201915 and no corrective action was
taken in either case. Coder did not re-file the Notice of Filing Written Consent to
Join as Plaintiffs nor did Plaintiffs file a motion to amend. Accordingly, McBee, Green
and Slack were never properly added as plaintiffs in this case. Defendant’s Motion
to Sever is, therefore, denied as moot with respect to McBee, Green and Slack.

See, Bocage v. M-I, LLC, Civ. A. No. 17-6124-GGG-JVM (E.D. La.) (R. Doc. 42).
Id.
15 Bocage v. M-I, LLC, Civ. A. No. 17-6124-GGG-JVM (E.D. La.) (R. Doc.43); Coder, et al. v. M-I, LLC,
Civ. A. No. 17-15074 (E.D. La.) (R. Doc. 7).
13
14

Additionally, the parties recently filed joint stipulations of dismissal with
respect to Craig Dawson, Murray Alford, Michael Maloy, Robert Theiss and Cory
Veuleman, who have been dismissed without prejudice from this case.16 Thus, the
only remaining plaintiff in this action is Robert Coder.

The Court, therefore, finds

that the Motion to Sever must be denied as moot.
III.

Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s
Motion to Sever17 is DENIED as moot.
New Orleans, Louisiana, September 11, 2019.

______________________________
WENDY B. VITTER
United States District Judge

16
17

See R. Docs. 19, 20, 22, 24.
R. Doc. 12.