United States District Court, D. Kansas
RONNIE MCGOWAN, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
GENESIS HEALTH CLUBS MANAGEMENT, INC., Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
D. Crabtree United States District Judge
Ronnie McGowan worked as a Fitness Advisor for defendant
Genesis Health Clubs Management, Inc. He brings this action
against defendant, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, asserting that defendant violated the
Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and the Kansas
Wage Payment Act (“KWPA”) by failing to pay its
employees overtime compensation.
has filed a Motion to Dismiss. Doc. 10. The motion asks the
court to dismiss Count II of plaintiff's Complaint-the
KWPA claim-under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Defendant asserts that plaintiff's KWPA claim fails to
state a plausible claim for relief because Kansas law
precludes plaintiff from asserting state law overtime wage
claims against an employer covered by the FLSA. Plaintiff has
filed an Opposition to defendant's Motion to Dismiss.
Doc. 14. And defendant has filed a Reply. Doc. 15.
considering the parties' arguments, the court grants
defendant's Motion to Dismiss. The court explains why
following facts are taken from plaintiff's Complaint. The
court accepts the facts asserted in the Complaint as true and
views them in the light most favorable to plaintiff.
Burnett v. Mortg. Elec. Registration Sys., Inc., 706
F.3d 1231, 1235 (10th Cir. 2013) (citing Smith v. United
States, 561 F.3d 1090, 1098 (10th Cir. 2009)).
is a health and fitness club who operates about 40 locations
in Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and Oklahoma. From February
2017 until April 2017, defendant employed plaintiff as a
Fitness Advisor at one of its health clubs in Overland Park,
Kansas. Defendant paid plaintiff on a salary plus commission
plaintiff's employment, defendant had a policy and
practice of failing and refusing to pay overtime compensation
to its Fitness Advisors for all hours worked exceeding 40
hours per week. Defendant subjected plaintiff and other
employees to this policy and practice during their
employment. According to plaintiff, defendant requires its
Fitness Advisors to work about 50 hours per week. Thus,
plaintiff asserts, defendant failed to pay him and other
similarly situated employees overtime compensation for all
asserts that defendant's pay practices violate the FLSA,
29 U.S.C. § 216(b), and the KWPA, Kan. Stat. Ann. §
44-313, et seq. He seeks to bring his FLSA claim as
a collective action under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) and his
KWPA claim as a class action under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 23. Plaintiff asks to represent a putative class
that includes current and former employees of defendant who
worked as Fitness Advisors in Kansas, and throughout the
nation, and who never received overtime compensation for all
Civ. P. 8(a)(2) provides that a complaint must contain
“a short and plain statement of the claim showing that
the pleader is entitled to relief.” Although this Rule
“does not require ‘detailed factual allegations,
'” it demands more than “[a] pleading that
offers ‘labels and conclusions' or ‘a
formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of
action'” which, as the Supreme Court explained,
“will not do.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556
U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v.
Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)).
complaint to survive a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6),
the pleading “must contain sufficient factual matter,
accepted as true, to ‘state a claim for relief that is
plausible on its face.'” Iqbal, 556 U.S.
at 679 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). “A
claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads
factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable
inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct
alleged.” Id. at 678 (citing Twombly,
550 U.S. at 556). “The plausibility standard is not
akin to a ‘probability requirement, ' but it asks
for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted
unlawfully.” Id. (quoting Twombly,
550 U.S. at 556); see also Christy Sports, LLC v. Deer
Valley Resort Co., Ltd., 555 F.3d 1188, 1192 (10th Cir.
2009) (“The question is whether, if the allegations are
true, it is plausible and not merely possible that the
plaintiff is entitled to relief under the relevant
law.” (citation omitted)).
considering whether a plaintiff has stated a plausible claim,
the court must assume that the factual allegations in the
complaint are true. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (citing
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). But, the court is
“‘not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion
couched as a factual allegation.'” Id.
(quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555).
“‘Threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause
of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not
suffice'” to state a claim for relief. Bixler
v. Foster, 596 F.3d 751, 756 (10th Cir. 2010) (quoting
Iqbal, 556 U.S.at 678). Also, the complaint's
“[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right
to relief above the speculative level.”
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (citations omitted).