Embry Jerode Kidd

On a motion to dismiss an FLSA claim, treats the pleading bar as low and reads the complaint generously: a plaintiff need only allege a failure to pay overtime or minimum wages to covered employees, and at the collective stage need only allege that members share similar job requirements and pay provisions. Detailed function-by-function specificity is not required at the pleading stage.

“the requirements to state a claim of a FLSA violation are quite straightforward. The elements that must be shown are simply a failure to pay overtime compensation and/or minimum wages to covered employees and/or failure to keep payroll records in accordance with the Act.”

Will not do a litigant's work for it: an argument mentioned only in passing and not developed is deemed waived. Counsel who want a ground considered must brief it fully.

“But LifeStance does not develop this argument after its brief mention, and therefore, the undersigned will not examine it further ... the court need not consider perfunctory and underdeveloped arguments and that such arguments are waived.”

In a 28 U.S.C. 1404(a) venue analysis, gives a plaintiff's choice of forum only minimal deference when the plaintiff did not sue in its home forum, and in intellectual-property cases weights the locus of operative facts (the alleged infringer's principal place of business, where marketing and development decisions were made) as the controlling consideration.

“where a plaintiff has chosen a forum that is not its home forum, only minimal deference is required, and it is considerably easier to satisfy the burden of showing that other considerations make transfer proper.”

As a circuit judge, insists that a district court follow Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55's default-judgment procedure even against an unresponsive party, and will not let a plaintiff substitute an in-absentia trial for the notice and process Rule 55 requires -- including against a foreign sovereign that has stopped defending itself.

“the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide no method for a civil defendant to be tried in absentia. The default judgment procedures in Rule 55 are the only method the Rules establish for proceeding against a civil defendant who fails to defend.”

At sentencing, requires individualized findings before holding one defendant responsible for co-conspirators' losses; will not treat proof of a conspiracy's existence as automatically coextensive with the scope of a particular defendant's jointly undertaken criminal activity, even where the co-conspirators used the same methods and stolen instruments in close time and place.

“the district court committed a legal error when it concluded that 'conspiracy . . . equates to jointly undertaking criminal activity' and then failed to make individualized findings.”