This is a class action on behalf of all non-exempt employees working in California who are or were employed by BTC Laboratories, Inc., and U.S. Laboratories, Inc (“BTC” and “Defendant”) from May 26, 2004 to present. The Complaint alleges that BTC failed to compensate the class of workers for missed meal periods, wages owed, and failed to provide proper wage deduction statements.

On December 21, 2009, plaintiff James Icard filed a Class Action Complaint in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Francisco, entitled James Icard v. Ecolab, Inc. and Does 1 through 100, inclusive, designated as Case No. CGC-09-495344. The case seeks unpaid overtime for Route Managers and/or Route Sales Managers who have worked in California, do not cross state lines in the performance of their duties, and have not received full and correct pay for all hours worked and have not received accurate paycheck stubs.

Below are some questions concerning this case. If you have additional questions or comments, please use the comments form at the bottom of the page. We review all comments before publishing them to the website.

What is the status of the case?

On December 29, 2009, Defendant was served with the Summons and Complaint.

On January 28, 2010, Defendant, through its counsel, removed this action to the United States District Court, Northern District of California, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. sections 1332 and 1441.

On February 2, 2010, Defendant filed an Answer and a Motion to Dismiss the matter.

On March 23, 2010, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint.

On June 18, 2010, the federal court remanded the case back to state court.

On June 30, 2011, Defendant once again removed this action to the United States District Court, Northern District of California.

On September 30, 2011, the federal court once again remanded the case back to state court.

On or about October 13, 2011, Defendant petitioned the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal for an appeal of the remand order. The Ninth Circuit has not yet granted the petition to appeal. The case, therefore, is still pending in California state court.

The case has NOT been certified as a class action yet.

Who is affected by the case?

The suit seeks unpaid wages for all non-exempt Route Managers and/or Route Sales Managers who have worked in California within four years of the filing of the original complaint, do not cross state lines in the performance of their duties, and have not received full and correct pay for all hours worked and have not received accurate paycheck stubs. The wages sought include, but may not be limited to, unpaid overtime.

What types of damages does Plaintiff seek?

Plaintiff seeks damages for unpaid wages for hours worked (possibly including overtime hours) from on or about December 21, 2005 through the present. He also seeks various penalties available under the California Labor Code. Those penalties include a penalty under Labor Code section 226 for providing inaccurate paycheck stubs.

How does the settlement in the Clark v. Ecolab, Inc. case affect this case?

If you were a member of the settlement class in Clark v. Ecolab, Inc., case number 07-CIV-8623 in the federal district court for the Southern District of New York and you did not opt out of the settlement, then you would not be affected by the Icard case. If, however, you opted out of the Clark matter and were otherwise not a part of that settlement, then you could be a member of this new putative class action.

How do I get involved?

You may contact Plaintiff's counsel, Michael A. Strauss at Palay Law Firm, directly by emailing him using the contact form on this page. You may also call Palay Law Firm at (805) 641-6600. You can also post a question using the comment form below. All questions posted using the comment form will be reviewed by Palay Law Firm before being published.