NEWTON v. Parker Drilling Management Services, Inc., a Nevada Corporation, Defendant. (2019)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Brian NEWTON, an individual, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PARKER DRILLING MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LTD., Erroneously Sued as Parker Drilling Management Services, Inc., Defendant-Appellee, Parker Drilling Management Services, Inc., a Nevada Corporation, Defendant.

No. 15-56352

Decided: July 23, 2019

Before: PAEZ, BERZON, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

Michael Strauss, Esquire, Attorney, Strauss & Strauss, APC, Ventura, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant Ellen M. Bronchetti, Esquire, Attorney, DLA Piper LLP (US), San Francisco, CA, Ronald J. Holland, Esquire, Attorney, McDermott Will & Emery, San Francisco, CA, Karin Dougan Vogel, Esquire, Attorney, Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP, San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellee George W. Abele, Esquire, Attorney, Paul Hastings LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Kevin Murray Fong, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, San Francisco, CA, Jeremy C. Marwell, Vinson & Elkins LLP, Washington, DC, Benjamin G. Shatz, Attorney, Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Amici Curiae Freeport-McMoran Oil and Gas LLC, Beta Operating Company, LLC, Amplify Energy Corp., DCOR, LLC, Exxon Mobil Corporation, California Independent Petroleum Association, Independent Petroleum Association of America, Offshore Operators Committee, National Association of Manufacturers, National Ocean Industries Association, Western States Petroleum Association, Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America Richard Abbott Samp, Chief Counsel, Washington Legal Foundation, Washington, DC, for Amicus Curiae-Pending Washington Legal Foundation

ORDER *

Brian Newton sued his former employer, Parker Drilling, in California state court for wage and hour violations under California law. Parker removed the case to federal district court and moved for judgment on the pleadings. The district court granted Parker's motion, concluding that under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. §§ 1331–1356b (“OCSLA”), the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et. seq., is a comprehensive statutory scheme that leaves no room for state law to address wage and hour grievances. Newton appealed, and we vacated and remanded. Newton v. Parker Drilling Mgmt. Servs., 881 F.3d 1078, 1081–82 (9th Cir. 2018). Parker petitioned for writ of certiorari, which the Supreme Court granted. Parker Drilling Mgmt. Servs. v. Newton, ––– U.S. ––––, 139 S. Ct. 914, 202 L.Ed.2d 641 (2019).

The Supreme Court's opinion issued on June 10, 2019. Parker Drilling Mgmt. Servs. v. Newton, ––– U.S. ––––, 139 S. Ct. 1881, 204 L.Ed.2d 165 (2019). In accordance with the Court's opinion, we affirm the district court's order dismissing Newton's California law minimum wage and overtime claims. Because our opinion did not analyze Newton's other state-law claims and held that Newton should be given leave to amend his complaint, the Supreme Court vacated and remanded the case to us. We, in turn, VACATE and REMAND to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law