On November 12, 2014, in a case of first impression for the court, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Landers v. Quality Communications, Inc. addressed the degree of specificity required to state a claim for failure to pay minimum wages or overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). (No. 12-15890, (9th Cir. Nov. 12, 2014)).

The plaintiff, Greg Landers (Landers), was employed by Quality Communications, Inc. (Quality) as a cable services installer. Landers brought suit individually and on behalf of other similarly situated persons, alleging that Quality violated the FLSA by failing to pay minimum wages and overtime wages. Quality moved to dismiss the complaint under FRCP 8(a)(2) and 12(b)(6). The US District Court for the District of Nevada granted the motion, finding that Landers failed to state a plausible claim for unpaid minimum wages and overtime wages. Landers appealed.

The Ninth Circuit affirmed. In reaching its decision, the court recognized the circuit split on what facts must be affirmatively pled to state an FLSA claim under Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009). The court held that it is not enough for a complaint to merely allege that the employer failed to pay the employee minimum wages or overtime wages as required by the FLSA. The allegations in the complaint must plausibly state a claim that the employer failed to pay the employee minimum wages or overtime wages (and not merely paraphrase the statute).

The Ninth Circuit joined the standard articulated by the US Courts of Appeals for the First, Second and Third Circuits and found that a plaintiff must allege that he worked more than forty hours in a given workweek without being paid for the hours worked in excess of forty during that week, or was not paid minimum wages. However, the court declined to require the plaintiffs to approximate the number of hours worked without compensation.

Update: On January 26, 2014, the Ninth Circuit issued an amended decision in this case that did not substantially change its rulings (Landers v. Quality Commc'ns, Inc., 771 F.3d 638 (9th Cir. 2014), as amended (Jan. 26, 2015) ).