Free Joint Preliminary Status Report - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:08-cv-00218-MMS

Document 7

Filed 07/18/2008

Page 1 of 6

IN THE LFNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

MARY LAFERRIERE, Plaintiff,
V.

THE UNITED STATES, Defendant.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 08-218C (Judge Margaret M. Sweeney)

JOINT PRELIMINARY STATUS REPORT

Pursuant to Rule 16 and Appendix A of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims, plaintiff and defendant respectfully submit the following joint preliminary status report in response to the questions set forth in Part III of Appendix A. 3a. Jurisdiction: The parties agree that the Court has jurisdiction to entertain and to decide this action. b. Consolidation: The parties agree that this case should not be consolidated with any other cases pending in the United States Court of Federal Claims. However, plaintiff is employed by the same Federal agency, the Drug Enforcement Administration ("DEA"), as are many of the plaintiffs in Adams, et al. v. United States, Case No. 90-162C, Boston, et al. v. United States, Case No. 01-518C, Kenneth W. Giles, et al. v. United States, Case No. 04-1283C, Thomas E. English, et al. v. United
States, Case No. 05-572C, Lydia Y. Bagley, et al. v. United States, Case No. 06-103C, Julia E. Antilla, et al. v. United States, Case No. 06-139C, Alan M. Evans, et al. v. United States, Case No. 06-183C, Paula F. Albert, et al. v. United States, Case No. 06-223C, Roberta Goralczyk, et al. v. United States, Case No. 06-283C, Carlos M. Aquino, et al. v. United States, Case No. 06-367C,

Case 1:08-cv-00218-MMS

Document 7

Filed 07/18/2008

Page 2 of 6

Wayne Groves, et al. v. United States, Case No. 06-456C, Evangela Forbes v. United States, Case No. 06-510C, Kerry_ Hamilton v. United States, Case No. 06-680C, Deborah A. George v. United States, Case No. 06-776C, Linda A. Stocum v. United States, Case No. 07-03C, Jeffrey B. Morgan v. United States, Case No. 07-232C, Christopher J. Grush v. United States, Case No. 07-232C, Diane M. Gibson, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-284C, Andrew W. Breiner, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-249C, Paul G. Jaster, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-299C, David P. Brown v. United States, Case No. 07-325C, Anita Chalmers v. United States, Case No. 07-361 C, Matthew J. Crusan, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-434C, Shannon M. Garner, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-525C, Luis A. Carrion, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-626C, Janice R. Barnes, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-682C, Claude M. Redd, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-718C, Maria L. Gilbert, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-731 C, Zoraida Gonzalez, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-790C, William J. Salera v. United States, Case No. 07-886C, Kathy L. Federico, et al. v. United States, Case No. 08-44C and Susan C. Zennan v. United States, Case No. 08-200C, Nicole S. Bornstein, et al. v. United States, Case No. 08-367C and Joseph R. Brown, et al. v. United States, Case No. 08-503C, and asserts claims similar, if not identical, to the claims asse.rted in such cases. On June 29, 2007, a partial settlement agreement was reached and stipulations of partial dismissal were filed for the aforementioned cases with the exception of the instant case and Jeffrey B. Morgan v. United States, Case No. 07-232C, Christopher J. Grush v. United States, Case No. 07-232C, Diane M. Gibson, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-284C, Andrew W. Breiner, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-249C, Paul G. Jaster. et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-299C, David P. Brown v. United States, Case No. 07-325C, Anita Chalmers v. United States, Case No. 07-361 C, Matthew J. Crusan, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-434C, Shannon M. Garner, et al. v. United States, Case

-2-

Case 1:08-cv-00218-MMS

Document 7

Filed 07/18/2008

Page 3 of 6

No. 07-525C, Luis A. Carrion, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-626C, Janice R. Barnes, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-682C, Claude M. Redd, et al. v. U.S., Case No. 07-718C, Maria L. Gilbert, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-731 C, Zoraida Gonzalez, et al. v. United States, Case No. 07-790C, William J. Salera v. United States, Case No. 07-886C, Kathy L. Federico, et al. v. United States, Case No. 08-44C and Susan C. Zennan v. United States, Case No. 08-200C, Nicole S. Bornstein, et al. v. United States, Case No. 08-367C and Joseph R. Brown, et al. v. United States, Case No. 08-503C. c. Bifurcation: The parties agree that the issues of liability and damages should be bifurcated. d. Deferral: The parties agree that this case should not be deferred pending resolution of any other

cases. e. Remand/Suspension: None of the parties seek remand or suspension. f. Joinder: Counsel do not anticipate joining additional parties. g. Dispositive Motions: At this time the parties have not discussed the filing ofdispositive motions pursuant to RCFC 12(b) or 12(c) in this case. h. Relevant Issues: The parties submit that among the major relevant issues presented herein are the following:

Case 1:08-cv-00218-MMS

Document 7

Filed 07/18/2008

Page 4 of 6

1.

Whether plaintiff, while employed in a non-supervisory position at DEA, was

employed in a capacity that is exempt from the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seth., pursuant to the administrative exemption set forth thereunder? 2. In the event plaintiff prevails on the issue of liability, what are the appropriate

statutes of limitations applicable to plaintiff's claims? 3. In the event plaintiff prevails on the issue of liability, whether plaintiff is

entitled to an award of liquidated damages? 4. In the event plaintiff prevails on the issue of liability, what is the amount of

compensatory damages to which plaintiffs is entitled and are such damages due for driving a Government owned vehicle from home to work and work to home? 5. In the event plaintiff prevails on the issue of liability, whether plaintiff is

entitled to interest on its recovery? i. Settlement: The parties believe there is a reasonable likelihood of settlement on the issue of whether certain plaintiffs are exempt from the FLSA as well as a likelihood that the amount of damages due plaintiffs can be resolved. It is unlikely that parties will resolve through settlement whether plaintiffs are entitled to be compensated for driving a Government-owned vehicle from home to work and work to home. j. Trial: The parties currently are unable to predict whether this matter will proceed to trial. k. Electronic case management: There are no special issues regarding electronic case management needs.

-4-

Case 1:08-cv-00218-MMS

Document 7

Filed 07/18/2008

Page 5 of 6

1.

Additional Information: Appellants' petition for writ of certiorari filed in Stephen S. Adams, et al. v. United

States, No. 70-116 (July 27, 2007), seeking review of the Federal Circuit's March 14, 2007 ruling against the plaintiffs concerning the home-to-work driving issue involved, was denied on January 7, 2008. However, the parties continue to litigate home-to-work driving issues in other cases pending in the United States Court of Federal Claims. Respectfully submitted, GREGORY G. KATSAS Assistant Attorney General JEANNE E. DAVIDSON Director JULES ~TEIN Bernstein & Lipsett, P.C. 1920 L Street, N.W. Suite 303 Washington, D.C. 20036 OF COUNSEL: L1NDA LIPSETT Tel: (202) 296-1798 Fax_2" (202) 29,£~,7220

TODD M. HUGHES Deputy Director

James & Hoffman, P.C. 1101 17th Street, N.W. Suite 510 Washington, D.C. 20036 Tel: (202) 496-0500 Fax: (202) 496-0555 Attorneys for Plaintiff
Dated: July 18, 2008

SHALOM BRILLIANT Senior Trial Counsel Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice Attn: Classification Unit 1100 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 Tel: (202) 616-8275 Fax: (202) 305-7643 Attorneys for Defendant
Dated: July 18, 2008

-5-

Case 1:08-cv-00218-MMS

Document 7

Filed 07/18/2008

Page 6 of 6

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 18th day of July, 2008, a copy of the foregoing "JOINT PRELIMINARY STATUS REPORT" was filed electronically. I understand that notice of this filing will be sent to all parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing through the Court's system.

s/Shalom Brilliant