Fetrow-Fix et al v. Harrah's Entertainment, Inc.

Filing 113

ORDER Denying as Moot 103 Motion to Toll the Statute of Limitations for Claims Asserting Violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-219. Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 12/29/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

6
7
8
9
10
11

CHARI FETROW-FIX, et al.,

)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
Case No. 2:10-cv-00560-RLH-PAL
)
vs.
)
ORDER
)
HARRAH’S ENTERTAINMENT, INC., et al.,
) (Mot Toll the Statute of Limitations - Dkt.#103)
)
Defendants. )
__________________________________________)

12
13

Before the court is Plaintiffs’ Motion to Toll the Statute of Limitations for Claims Asserting

14

Violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-219 (Dkt. #103). The court has

15

considered the Motion, Defendants’ Response (Dkt. #105), and Plaintiffs’ Reply (Dkt. #109).

16

Plaintiffs request that the court toll the statute of limitations for claims asserting violations of

17

the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) for the period of time their motions for conditional certification

18

and Defendants’ motion for summary judgment were pending.

19

In Alvarez-Machain v. United States, 107 F.3d 696, 701 (9th Cir. 1996), the Ninth Circuit

20

recognized that federal courts have applied the doctrine of equitable tolling in two situations: (1) when

21

the plaintiffs are prevented from asserting their claims by some kind of wrongful conduct on the part of

22

the defendant; or (2) when extraordinary circumstances beyond plaintiffs’ control make it impossible to

23

file the claims on time. Plaintiffs request that the court toll the statute of limitations so that potential

24

opt-in Plaintiffs are not deprived of their legal rights while the court rules on various outstanding

25

motions, including Plaintiffs’ motion for conditional certification, Defendants’ motion for leave to file a

26

sur-reply, and Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff Fetrow-Fix’s claims.

27

Additionally, Plaintiffs contend the court should toll the statute of limitations for potential Plaintiffs so

28

that Defendants do not profit from their continued discovery abuses which delayed the filing of the

1
2

motion for conditional certification.
The court agrees that equitable tolling is an available arrow in the court’s quiver to prevent

3

parties from engaging in abusive litigation tactics and obstructing legitimate discovery, and will not

4

hesitate to use the remedy in an appropriate case. However, the undersigned has denied Plaintiff’s

5

motion for conditional certification and Defendants’ motion for leave to file a surr-reply, and the district

6

judge has granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment on Plaintiff Fetrow-Fix’s FLSA claims.

7

Plaintiffs’ motion to toll the statute of limitations will therefore be denied as moot.

8
9
10

IT IS ORDERED Plaintiffs’ Motion to Toll the Statute of Limitations for Claims Asserting
Violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-219 (Dkt. #103) is DENIED as MOOT.
Dated this 29th day of December, 2011.

11
12
13

_________________________________________
Peggy A. Leen
United States Magistrate Judge

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2