Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 1 of 36 Page ID #:837
`
`DANIELLE J. MOSS (admitted pro hac vice)
`dmoss@gibsondunn.com
`GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
`200 Park Avenue
`New York, NY 10166-0193
`Telephone: 212.351.4000
`Facsimile: 212.351.4035
`
`MEGAN COONEY, SBN 295174
`mcooney@gibsondunn.com
`LAUREN M. FISCHER, SBN 318625
`lfischer@gibsondunn.com
`GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
`3161 Michelson Drive
`Irvine, CA 92612-4412
`Telephone: 949.451.3800
`Facsimile: 949.451.4220
`Attorneys for Defendant PELOTON
`INTERACTIVE, INC.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`MARK COHEN, as an individual and
` CASE NO. 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E
`on behalf of all others similarly situated,
`DEFENDANT PELOTON
`INTERACTIVE, INC.’S ANSWER TO
`Plaintiff,
`PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED
`COMPLAINT
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`
`
`v.
`PELOTON INTERACTIVE, INC., a
`Delaware corporation; and DOES 1
`through 50, inclusive,
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 2 of 36 Page ID #:838
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Defendant Peloton Interactive, Inc. (“Peloton”) hereby answers the Second
`Amended Complaint (“SAC”) of Plaintiff Mark Cohen (“Plaintiff”) as follows:
`INTRODUCTION
`Answering Paragraph 1 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff seeks
`1.
`to bring claims on behalf of a class allegedly pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section
`382. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph
`1 of the SAC, denies that Code of Civil Procedure section 382 applies to Plaintiff’s
`claims, and denies that this action may be maintained on a class or representative basis.
`Answering Paragraph 2 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that this Court has
`2.
`jurisdiction. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations in Paragraph
`2 of the SAC and denies that this action may be maintained on a class or representative
`basis.
`Paragraph 3 of the SAC contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`3.
`required. To the extent a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 3 of the SAC.
`Paragraph 4 of the SAC contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`4.
`required. To the extent a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 4 of the SAC.
`Paragraph 5 of the SAC contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`5.
`required. To the extent a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 5 of the SAC.
`Paragraph 6 of the SAC contains legal conclusions to which no response is
`6.
`required. To the extent a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 6 of the SAC.
`Answering Paragraph 7 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff, via
`7.
`the SAC, purportedly seeks penalties for certain alleged Labor Code violations pursuant
`to the California Private Attorneys General Act, Cal. Lab. Code §§ 2698 et seq.
`(“PAGA”). Peloton lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 3 of 36 Page ID #:839
`
`whether Plaintiff provided the appended notice to the LWDA. Except as expressly
`admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 7 of the SAC.
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`To the extent Paragraph 8 of the SAC states legal conclusions, Peloton is
`8.
`not required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton admits that this Court has
`jurisdiction. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 8 of the SAC.
`Answering Paragraph 9 of the SAC, Peloton admits that Plaintiff worked
`9.
`for Peloton in Santa Monica, California and Century City, California, which are located
`within the Central District of California. Peloton admits that venue is proper in the
`Central District of California. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the
`allegations set forth in Paragraph 9 of the SAC.
`PARTIES
`10. Answering Paragraph 10 of the SAC, Peloton admits that Plaintiff was
`employed by Peloton as a Sales Specialist at Peloton’s Santa Monica, California or
`Century City, California Showrooms from on or about and between December 7, 2016
`to December 14, 2021. Peloton admits that, from time to time, it paid Plaintiff additional
`remuneration. Peloton also admits that it had a policy and/or procedure whereby
`Plaintiff would accrue paid vacation time and/or personal time off (PTO). Peloton lacks
`sufficient information to admit or deny whether it paid Plaintiff or any allegedly
`similarly situated employees nondiscretionary remuneration that was required to be
`included in the regular rate of pay, or whether Plaintiff or any allegedly similarly situated
`employees incurred necessary and reasonable business expenditures for which they
`sought reimbursement, and on that basis denies the allegations in Paragraph 10. Peloton
`expressly denies that it violated any provision of the California Labor Code related to
`Plaintiff’s employment, or the employment of any other Peloton employee that Plaintiff
`seeks to represent, or any other third party or entity. Except as expressly admitted,
`Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 10 of the SAC.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 4 of 36 Page ID #:840
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`11. Answering Paragraph 11 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff was
`employed by Peloton as a Sales Specialist at Peloton’s Santa Monica, California or
`Century City, California Showrooms from on or about and between December 7, 2016
`to December 14, 2021. Peloton’s last known contact information for Plaintiff reflects
`that he resided in Los Angeles, California. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies
`the allegations set forth in Paragraph 11 of the SAC.
`12. Answering Paragraph 12 of the SAC, Peloton denies that it violated any
`provision of the California Labor Code with respect to any Peloton employee that
`Plaintiff seeks to represent, or any other third party or entity. Peloton further denies that
`Plaintiff’s allegations cannot be resolved on a classwide or representative basis because
`of the highly individualized variations that exist as a result of, by way of non-exhaustive
`illustrative example only, different types of job roles, facilities, work locations, and
`managers. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 12 of the SAC.
`13. Answering Paragraph 13 of the SAC, Peloton admits that it is an interactive
`fitness platform with certain sales and field operations in the State of California. Peloton
`admits that it is licensed to, and conducts business in, the State of California. Except as
`expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 13 of the SAC.
`14. Paragraph 14 of the SAC contains a pleading device and legal conclusion
`to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Peloton denies
`the allegations set forth in Paragraph 14 of the SAC.
`15. Paragraph 15 of the SAC contains a pleading device and legal conclusion
`to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Peloton denies
`the allegations set forth in Paragraph 15 of the SAC.
`16. Paragraph 16 of the SAC contains a pleading device and legal conclusion
`to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Peloton denies
`the allegations set forth in Paragraph 16 of the SAC.
`
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 5 of 36 Page ID #:841
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`17. Paragraph 17 of the SAC contains a pleading device and legal conclusion
`to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Peloton denies
`the allegations set forth in Paragraph 17 of the SAC.
`18. Paragraph 18 of the SAC contains a pleading device and legal conclusion
`to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Peloton denies
`the allegations set forth in Paragraph 18 of the SAC.
`CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
`19. Paragraph 19 of the SAC contains a pleading device and legal conclusion
`to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Peloton denies
`the allegations set forth in Paragraph 19 of the SAC, denies that Code of Civil Procedure
`section 382 applies to Plaintiff’s claims, and denies that this action may be maintained
`on a class or representative basis.
`20. To the extent Paragraph 20 of the SAC states legal conclusions, Peloton is
`not required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 20 of the SAC and denies that this action may be maintained on a class or
`representative basis.
`21. To the extent Paragraph 21 of the SAC states legal conclusions, Peloton is
`not required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 21 of the SAC and denies that this action may be maintained on a class or
`representative basis.
`22. Answering Paragraph 22 of the SAC, Peloton denies that it violated any
`provision of the California Labor Code with respect to any Peloton employee that
`Plaintiff seeks to represent, or any other third party or entity. Peloton further denies that
`Plaintiff’s allegations cannot be resolved on a classwide or representative basis because
`of the highly individualized variations that exist as a result of, by way of illustrative and
`non-exhaustive example only, different facilities, job roles, work locations, and
`managers. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 22 of the SAC.
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 6 of 36 Page ID #:842
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`23. To the extent Paragraph 23 of the SAC states legal conclusions, Peloton is
`not required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 23 and denies that this action may be maintained on a class or representative
`basis.
`24. To the extent Paragraph 24 of the SAC states legal conclusions, Peloton is
`not required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 24 of the SAC and denies that this action may be maintained on a class or
`representative basis.
`25. To the extent Paragraph 25 of the SAC states legal conclusions, Peloton is
`not required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 25 of the SAC and denies that this action may be maintained on a class or
`representative basis.
`26. To the extent Paragraph 26 of the SAC states legal conclusions, Peloton is
`not required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 26 of the SAC and denies that this action may be maintained on a class or
`representative basis.
`27. To the extent Paragraph 27 of the SAC states legal conclusions, Peloton is
`not required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 27 of the SAC and denies that this action may be maintained on a class or
`representative basis.
`28. To the extent Paragraph 28 of the SAC states legal conclusions, Peloton is
`not required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 28 of the SAC and denies that this action may be maintained on a class or
`representative basis.
`29. To the extent Paragraph 29 of the SAC states legal conclusions, Peloton is
`not required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 29 of the SAC and denies that this action may be maintained on a class or
`representative basis.
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 7 of 36 Page ID #:843
`
`
`30. To the extent Paragraph 30 of the SAC states legal conclusions, Peloton is
`not required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 30 of the SAC and denies that this action may be maintained on a class or
`representative basis.
`
`FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
`VIOLATION OF CAL. LABOR CODE §§ 226.7 AND 512
`(BY PLAINTIFF AND THE MEAL BREAK CLASS AGAINST ALL
`DEFENDANTS)
`31. Paragraph 31 of the SAC contains a pleading device to which no response
`is required. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph
`31 of the SAC. Peloton also repeats and incorporates by reference each and every denial,
`admission, and/or averment set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 30 above as though fully
`set forth herein. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 31 of the SAC.
`32. Answering Paragraph 32 of the SAC, Peloton admits that Labor Code
`section 226.7(c) contains the language quoted in Paragraph 32 of the SAC. To the extent
`Paragraph 32 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not required to respond. If a
`response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 32 of the SAC,
`denies that this action may be maintained as a class or representative action, and denies
`that Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former employees he seeks to represent are
`entitled to any relief whatsoever.
`33. To the extent Paragraph 33 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 33 of the SAC.
`34. To the extent Paragraph 34 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 34 of the SAC.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 8 of 36 Page ID #:844
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`35. Answering Paragraph 35 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff and
`the alleged putative Meal Break class members, as defined in Paragraph 10, purport to
`seek to recover allegedly unpaid premium compensation, interest thereon, penalties, and
`costs of suit. Peloton denies that Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former
`employees he seeks to represent are entitled to any relief whatsoever. Except as
`expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 35 of the SAC.
`SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
`VIOLATION OF CAL. LABOR CODE § 226.7
`(BY PLAINTIFF AND THE REST BREAK CLASS AGAINST ALL
`DEFENDANTS)
`36. Paragraph 36 of the SAC contains a pleading device to which no response
`is required. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph
`36 of the SAC. Peloton also repeats and incorporates by reference each and every denial,
`admission, and/or averment set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 35 above as though fully
`set forth herein. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 36 of the SAC.
`37. To the extent Paragraph 37 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 37 of the SAC, denies that this action may be maintained as a class or
`representative action, and denies that Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former
`employees he seeks to represent are entitled to any relief whatsoever.
`38. To the extent Paragraph 38 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton admits that Plaintiff was at times
`scheduled to work 3.5 or more hours in a workday, and expressly denies that Plaintiff
`was ever prevented from taking rest periods or was not provided rest periods. Except as
`expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 38 of the SAC.
`39. Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 39 of the SAC.
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 9 of 36 Page ID #:845
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`40. To the extent Paragraph 40 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 40 of the SAC.
`41. To the extent Paragraph 41 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 41 of the SAC, denies that this action may be maintained as a class or
`representative action, and denies that Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former
`employees he seeks to represent are entitled to any relief whatsoever.
`42. Answering Paragraph 42 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff and
`the putative Rest Break class members purportedly seek to recover allegedly unpaid
`premium compensation, interest thereon, penalties, and costs of suit. Peloton denies that
`Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former employees he seeks to represent are
`entitled to any relief whatsoever. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the
`allegations set forth in Paragraph 42 of the SAC.
`THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
`VIOLATION OF CAL. LABOR CODE §§ 226, 1174, AND 1174.5
`(BY PLAINTIFF AND THE WAGE STATEMENT CLASS AGAINST ALL
`DEFENDANTS)
`43. Paragraph 43 of the SAC contains a pleading device to which no response
`is required. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph
`43 of the SAC. Peloton also repeats and incorporates by reference each and every denial,
`admission, and/or averment set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 42 above as though fully
`set forth herein. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 43 of the SAC.
`44. Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 44 of the SAC, denies
`that this action may be maintained as a class or representative action, and denies that
`Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former employees he seeks to represent are
`entitled to any relief whatsoever.
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 10 of 36 Page ID #:846
`
`
`45. Answering Paragraph 45 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff
`seeks to represent a putative class of hourly, nonexempt Peloton employees. To the
`extent Paragraph 45 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not required to respond.
`Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 45 of
`the SAC.
`46. Answering Paragraph 46 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff and
`the putative Wage Statement class members purport to seek damages, penalties, interest
`thereon, attorneys’ fees, and costs of suit under Labor Code section 226. Peloton denies
`that Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former employees he seeks to represent are
`entitled to any relief whatsoever. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the
`allegations set forth in Paragraph 46 of the SAC.
`FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`VIOLATION OF CAL. LABOR CODE §§ 510, 558, 1194, AND 1198
`(BY PLAINTIFF AND THE OVERTIME AND REGULAR RATE CLASSES
`AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS)
`47. Paragraph 47 of the SAC contains a pleading device to which no response
`is required. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph
`47 of the SAC. Peloton also repeats and incorporates by reference each and every denial,
`admission, and/or averment set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 46 above as though fully
`set forth herein. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 47 of the SAC.
`48. Answering Paragraph 48 of the SAC, Peloton admits that the Division of
`Labor Standards Enforcement – Enforcement Policies and Interpretations Manual,
`Section 49.1.2 contains the language quoted in Paragraph 48 of the SAC. To the extent
`Paragraph 48 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not required to respond. If a
`response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 48 of the SAC,
`denies that this action may be maintained as a class or representative action, and denies
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 11 of 36 Page ID #:847
`
`that Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former employees he seeks to represent are
`entitled to any relief whatsoever.
`49. Answering Paragraph 49 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that, from time
`to time, it paid Plaintiff additional remuneration in addition to his wages. To the extent
`Paragraph 49 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not required to respond. Except as
`expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 49 of the SAC.
`50. To the extent Paragraph 50 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 50 of the SAC.
`51. Answering Paragraph 51 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff and
`the putative Overtime and Regular Rate class members seek damages, interest thereon,
`penalties, attorneys’ fees, and costs of suit under Labor Code sections 510 and 1194.
`Peloton denies that Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former employees he seeks to
`represent are entitled to any relief whatsoever. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton
`denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 51 of the SAC.
`FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`FAILURE TO PAY WAGES FOR ALL TIME WORKED INCLUDING
`MINIMUM WAGE IN VIOLATION OF LABOR CODE §§ 200, 204, 218, 1194
`AND 1197
`(BY PLAINTIFF AND THE UNPAID WAGE CLASS AGAINST ALL
`DEFENDANTS)
`52. Paragraph 52 of the SAC contains a pleading device to which no response
`is required. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph
`52 of the SAC. Peloton also repeats and incorporates by reference each and every denial,
`admission, and/or averment set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 51 above as though fully
`set forth herein. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 52 of the SAC.
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 12 of 36 Page ID #:848
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`53. Answering Paragraph 53 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff
`seeks to represent a putative class of hourly, nonexempt Peloton employees. Except as
`expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 53 of the SAC.
`54. To the extent Paragraph 54 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 54 of the SAC.
`55. To the extent Paragraph 55 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 55 of the SAC.
`56. To the extent Paragraph 56 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 56 of the SAC.
`57. Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 57 of the SAC.
`58. Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 58 of the SAC.
`59. To the extent Paragraph 59 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 59 of the SAC, denies that this action may be maintained as a class or
`representative action, and denies that Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former
`employees he seeks to represent are entitled to any relief whatsoever.
`60. Answering Paragraph 60 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff and
`the putative Unpaid Wage class members purport to seek regular and minimum wages,
`interest thereon, liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs of suit. Peloton denies
`that Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former employees he seeks to represent are
`entitled to any relief whatsoever. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the
`allegations set forth in Paragraph 60 of the SAC.
`61. To the extent Paragraph 61 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 61 of the SAC.
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 13 of 36 Page ID #:849
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`FAILURE TO PAY ALL ACCRUED AND VESTED VACATION/PTO WAGES
`IN VIOLATION OF LABOR CODE § 227.3
`(BY PLAINTIFF AND THE VACATION WAGE CLASS AGAINST ALL
`DEFENDANTS)
`62. Paragraph 62 of the SAC contains a pleading device to which no response
`is required. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph
`62 of the SAC. Peloton also repeats and incorporates by reference each and every denial,
`admission, and/or averment set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 61 above as though fully
`set forth herein. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 62 of the SAC.
`63. Answering Paragraph 63 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff
`seeks to represent a putative class of hourly, nonexempt Peloton employees. Except as
`expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 63 of the SAC.
`Peloton further denies that Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former employees he
`seeks to represent are entitled to any relief whatsoever. Except as expressly admitted,
`Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 63 of the SAC.
`64. Answering Paragraph 64 of the SAC, Peloton admits that California Labor
`Code section 227.3 contains the language quoted in Paragraph 64 of the SAC. Except
`as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 64 of the
`SAC.
`65. Answering Paragraph 65 of the SAC, Peloton admits that it had a policy
`and/or procedure whereby Plaintiff would accrue paid vacation time and/or personal
`time off (PTO). Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 65 of the SAC.
`66. Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 66 of the SAC.
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 14 of 36 Page ID #:850
`
`
`67. To the extent Paragraph 67 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 67 of the SAC.
`68. Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 68 of the SAC, denies
`that this action may be maintained as a class or representative action, and denies that
`Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former employees he seeks to represent are
`entitled to any relief whatsoever.
`69. Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 69 of the SAC.
`70. Answering Paragraph 70 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff and
`the putative Vacation Wages class members purportedly seek allegedly earned and
`vested vacation/PTO wages or interest thereon. Peloton denies that Plaintiff and/or any
`of the current and former employees he seeks to represent are entitled to any relief
`whatsoever. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 70 of the SAC.
`71. To the extent Paragraph 71 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 71 of the SAC.
`SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`FAILURE TO ADEQUATELY INDEMNIFY EMPLOYEES FOR
`EMPLOYMENT-RELATED LOSSES/EXPENDITURES IN VIOLATION OF
`LABOR CODE § 2802
`(BY PLAINTIFF AND THE INDEMNIFICATION CLASS AGAINST ALL
`DEFENDANTS)
`72. Paragraph 72 of the SAC contains a pleading device to which no response
`is required. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph
`72 of the SAC. Peloton also repeats and incorporates by reference each and every denial,
`admission, and/or averment set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 71 above as though fully
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 15 of 36 Page ID #:851
`
`set forth herein. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth
`in Paragraph 72 of the SAC.
`73. Answering Paragraph 73 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that it employed
`Plaintiff for a discrete period of time in the State of California. To the extent Paragraph
`73 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not required to respond. Except as expressly
`admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph 73 of the SAC.
`74. To the extent Paragraph 74 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 74 of the SAC, denies that this action may be maintained as a class or
`representative action, and denies that Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former
`employees he seeks to represent are entitled to any relief whatsoever.
`75. To the extent Paragraph 75 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 75 of the SAC, denies that this action may be maintained as a class or
`representative action, and denies that Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former
`employees he seeks to represent are entitled to any relief whatsoever.
`76. To the extent Paragraph 76 includes legal conclusions, Peloton is not
`required to respond. If a response is required, Peloton denies the allegations set forth in
`Paragraph 76 of the SAC, denies that this action may be maintained as a class or
`representative action, and denies that Plaintiff and/or any of the current and former
`employees he seeks to represent are entitled to any relief whatsoever.
`77. Answering Paragraph 77 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff and
`the purportedly putative “Indemnification Class” members seek damages and all other
`relief allowable, including indemnification for all employment-related expenses and
`ordinary business expenses under Labor Code section 2802. Peloton denies that Plaintiff
`and/or any of the current and former employees he seeks to represent are entitled to any
`relief whatsoever, and denies that this action may be maintained as a class or
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`Gibson, Dunn &
`Crutcher LLP
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 2:22-cv-01425-MWF-E Document 39 Filed 08/26/22 Page 16 of 36 Page ID #:852
`
`representative action. Except as expressly admitted, Peloton denies the allegations set
`forth in Paragraph 77 of the SAC.
`78. Answering Paragraph 78 of the SAC, Peloton admits only that Plaintiff and
`the purportedly putative “Indemnification