Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
. .. . .
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 2 of 70
Page ID#: 13
4
5
6 7
Plaintiff,
8
9
10
11
Defendant.
12
13
~ L
14 COMPLA-ClAS ACTION
16 This is an action under state wage and hour laws for certin present and former
17 employees of Starbucks Corporation (hereinafter "STARUCKS") to recover civil
18 penalties (and pre- and post-judgent interest thereon), as well as for declaratory
19 and injunctive relief. All allegations herein are made to the best of Plaintiffs' and their
20 counsel's good-faith knowledge, information and belief, based upon the evidence
21 adduced to date. Plaintiffs have in their possession several documents frm Hannah
22 Frdrickson's employment (including those prouced by STARUCKS), but do not
23 have any time or pay record from Ashley Krening or Maurialee Bracke's employment
EXHIBIT 1
Page 2 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 3 of 70
Page ID#: 14
1 (or any of
the other class members). Before this litigation wa filed, Plaintiffs and
these
4 were provided; some were not The class action allegations made herein are therefore
5 founded upon STARUCKS documents specifically indicating that violations arise
8 happened if STARUCKS's computer system were not set up to allow and/or require
9 such violations to occur. Plaintiff intend to, and reserve the right to, amend their
10 Complaint to remove or add any individual and/or class violation allegations as
11 necessary after additional discovery. Based upon the facts now known, and/or to the
12 best of their information and belief arrived at after reasonable inquiry into the
13 circumstances, Hannah Fredrckson, Ashley Krening and MauIialee Bracke
14 (hereinafter "Employees") complain as follows against STARUCKS, on behalf of
15 themselves and all other Oregon STARUCKS employees who reported or were
16 imputed tips.
~ ~ 23 3.
22 reported or were imputed tips.
18 PARTIES
Multnomah County,
21 Oregon. The class members are or were Oregon employees of ST ARUCKS who
17
240 SIX11 S'l tAKE OSWEG. OR 970342931 1lLE0N: (503) 697-3427. FAX; (866) 311-5629
1N00EGANLEOAL-nAM.COM
EXHIBIT 1
Page 3 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 4 of 70
Page ID#: 15
3 STARUCKS owned, operated and managed over 100 coffee servce establishments
4 in the State of Oregon, including many in Multnomah County.
6 COMMON FACT
7 4.
8 With the information available to them at this time, Plaintiff base this class
9 action on STARUCKS's wrongfl deduction of three categories of
10 employees' wages based on imputed and other tip amounts. On information and
13 failure to pay for breaks under 30 minutes. Afer additional discovery, Plaintiffs
14 reerve the right to allege an entitlement to damages and/or injunctie relief
based
15 upon these additional potential violations, and they hereby give notice of their intent
16 to do so in that event.
17
20 5.
Page 3 - CLAS ACTION COMPLANT
22 containers locted in all STARUCKS stores, tyically nea the cah registers.
23 STARUCKS doe not allow customers to put tips on their credit cards.
240 SIXTH ST
LAE OSWEG. OR 97034-293 i TELEPHom: (503) 697-3427. FAX: (866) 3 i 1-5629
JON M. EGAN. p
INFO('EGANU!GALllAM.CO
EXHIBIT 1
Page 4 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
.'~.. .'" ,~.""".'
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 5 of 70
Page ID#: 16
1 6.
2 The tip-eligible employees pool these tips eveiy week, distributing them amongst
3 themselves according to a common formula: each tip-eligible employee gets the same
4 proporton of the tip pool as their proporton of the total hours worked that week at
6 ~
S that loction.
7 For paycheck purposes, STARUCKS assign a phantom amount of tips to each
8 employee-soe for each hour they worked. STARBUCKS call these phantom tips
9 "imputed tips." The employees never reported that they had received that amount of
12 thin air (50e per hour worked) and wrtes that down on the employee' pay stubs as
14 8.
17. employee voluntarily consents to the deduction in wrting. ORS 652.610(3). When
18 the Oregon Legilature enacted ORS 652.610(3) in 1977, there were laws on the books
19 in other states that allowed employers in those states to take deductions whenever
20 they were "required or permitted" or "required or empowered" to do so by law, or
21 when a deduction wa "in accordance with" or "authorized" by law. Oregon chose not
22 to adopt any of those constrctions. Instead, Oregon chose to allow only those
23 deductions that are "required" by law. That makes penect sense, since John W. Wolf,
EXHIBIT 1
Page 5 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 6 of 70
Page ID#: 17
2 both the House Committee on Labor and the Senate Committee on Labor, Consumer
3 and Business Afairs that part of that section's purpose wa "allowig the employee
4 some contrl over what can be deducted frm wages." It would be fully in keeping
5 with that purpose to require employers to get their employee' voluntary wrtten
6 consent before taking deductions from their paychecks that were merely allowed (not
8 9.
7 required) by law.
9 STARUCKS withholds Oregon income taes, federal income taes and federal
10 FICA taes frm its employees' paychecks for phantom amounts of tips it assigns
11 ("imputes") to the employees. The
16 10.
17 Oregon tax law prohibits employers from withholding Oregon income ta based
18 on tips that are given directly to the employee by their customers (i.e., that are not
19 collected and distrbuted by the employer). ORS 316.162 defines wages for
21 employer." Tips that are given directly by customers to employees do not fit into that
23 from its employees' wages based on any tip amounts (whether imputed or not). The
Page 5 - CLASS ACTION COMPLANT
JON M. EGAN. PC
IN~EGALEGAL11AM.CO
EXHIBIT 1
Page 6 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 7 of 70
Page ID#: 18
3 states, "8. How does Oregon treat withholdig on tip income? Tips paid by
4 the customer to the employee are not subject to withholding ta. Tips paid by the
5 customer to the employer who then distrbutes them to the employees are subjec to
6 witholding." "Wages" are defined identically in the unemployment benefits statute
7 (ORS 657.105), and the Oregon Court of Appeals has affrmed the Employment
8 Appeals Board's finding that, as stated in the Oregon Administrtive Rules, "Gift,
9 tips, or other gratuities received by an employee during the course of
his employment
10 from persons other than his employer are not wages." Callahan v. Employment Div.,
11 80 Or. App. 401, 403, 722 P.2d 1275,1276 review denied, 302 Or. 158,727 P.2d 128
12 (1986). All of
the tips in this case were paid directly by the customers to the
13 employees-cah only, no credit cards allowed, and the tips are never touched (or
14 even counted) by STARUCKS or its managers. Oregon withholding tax should
15 therefore not have been taken out. The deduction of Oregon income taes based on
16 employees'
17 11.
tips (both "imputed" and otherwse) is therefore ilegal under Oregon law.
20 to issue pay stubs to their employees every pay period that are "suffciently itemized
21 to show the amount and purpose of the deductions made." ORS 652.610(1).
22 STARBUCKS does not do that. STARUCKS's own internal records do itemize the
23 employees' deductons, identifyng which deductions are wage-based deductions and
lNEGANLEGALlEAM.CO
EXHIBIT 1
Page 7 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 8 of 70
Page ID#: 19
2 obtained by Plaintiffs' counsel, the following deductions are listed for Hannah
3 Fredckson's July 25, 2008 paycheck:
4
5 6
T:W/HEE:
7
T:OASDEE T:MedcEE:
0.38
21.82
OR Oregon
W/HEE:
9
10
WORCOMP:
T:W/HEE:
0.74 2.00
11 STARBUCKS's internal records separately list the taes on wages and the taes on
12 imputed tips, so they can tell which is which. Oregon income ta withholding for
13 wages, for example, is marked "W /H EE," while the Oregon income ta withheld for
14 tips is marked "T:W/H EE". The "T" stands for "tips." On the employees' pay stubs,
15 however, the deductions for wages and the deductions for tips are not separately
16 identified. They are combined with each other and mixed together. For example, in
17 the pay stub that was given to Hannah Fredrickson with that same July 25, 2008
20
21
TX Withholding TTX EE Social SecTX Withholding TTX EE Medicare TTX EE Worker Com-
22 There are two entres on the pay stub that both read "TX Withholding T -", and both
23 of them combine both wage taes and imputed tip taes. We know that the first one is
EXHIBIT 1
Page 8 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 9 of 70
Page ID#: 20
1 for federal income ta deduction and the second one is for Oregon income ta
2 deduction, but we only know that because we already have ST ARUCKS's internal
3 document to figure it out from. The Oregon income ta is sandwiched between the
4 federal Social Security and federal Medicare deductions (both of which alo combine
5 both wage taes and imputed tip taes). It is impossible for any employee to figure
6 out from their pay stub what taxes are taken out for what amounts, since the
8 therefore were not "suffciently itemized to show the amount and purpose of the
9 deductions made."
10
12 12.
20 employer share of FICA ta unless and until the IRS makes a notice and demand for
21 the taes from the company). For an employer to deduct taes based on a tip
22 statement, it "must be signed by the employee and must disclose: (i) The name,
23 address, and social security number of the employee. (ii) The name and address of
Page 8 - CLASS ACTION COMPLANT
JON M. EGAN. PC
EXHIBIT 1
Page 9 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 10 of 70
Page ID#: 21
1 the employer. (iii) The period for which, and the date on which, the statement is
2 . furnished. !fthe statement is for a period ofless than 1 calendar month, the
3 beginning and ending dates of the period must be included (for example, Januaiy 1
4 through January 8,1998). (iv) The total amount of
5 during the period covered by the statement which are required to be reported to the
6 employer (see paragraph (a) of
7 STARUCKS did not base its federal income ta withholding on any statutorily valid
8 tip statements. Plaintiffs never signed any paper tip statements at all. Before filing
9 this lawsuit, Plaintiffs requested 26 CFR 31.6053-1(d)(4) hard copies of any and all
13 13.
12 were ever provided.
14 Employers are allowed to use an electronic system for employees to report tips,
15 but that system "must ensure that the information received is the information
16 transmitted by the employee and must document all occasions of access that result in
17 the transmission of a tip statement. In addition, the design and operation of the
18 electronic system, including access procedures, must make it reaonably certin that
19 the person accessing the system and transmittng the statement is the employee
20 identified in the statement transmitted." 26 CFR 31.6053-1(d)(I). An employer
21 cannot deduct income taes based on an electronic tip statement unless it provides
22 the same information as a paper tip statement, and it must be signed by the
23 employee. 26 CFR 31.6053-1(d)(2)-(3). "The electronic signature must identify the
1N00EGALEGALlEAM.CO
EXHIBIT 1
.~,
Page 10 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 11 of 70
Page ID#: 22
1 employee transmittng the electronic tip statement and must authenticate and verify
2 the transmission. For this purpose, the terms authenticate and verif have the same
6 ~
11 15.
12 Because the employees did not report their tip amounts to STARUCKS, the
13 "imputed" tip amounts on their paychecks ca only be phantom (made-up) amounts.
14 There are only two legal reasons for an employer to report a phantom (made-up)
15 amount of tips to the federal government for an employee- "allocated" tips (which
16 are sometimes required) and "estimated" tips (which are never required).
17 16.
20 and beverage establishment must keep track of its aggegate gross sales. If all of the
21 tipped employees together report tips ofless than 8% of those aggegate gross sales,
22 the owner must "allocate" a phantom (made-up) amount of
23 make up the difference. The reported tips, plus the allocated tips, must total at least
EXHIBIT 1
Page 11 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 12 of 70
Page ID#: 23
2 withhold federal income taes or FICA taes from allocated tips. They simply report
3 the allocated tips to the government, as "allocated tips" in Box 8 of
the employee's W-
4 2. Only tips specificaly reported to the employer by the employee are supposed to be
S included with.the wages in box 1 of
6 cae of
his
7 employment, the amounts required to be shown by paragraphs (3) and (S) of section
8 6051(a) (see paragraph (a)(l)(i)(C) and (e) of
10 the employer pursuant to section 6053(a)."). See also Instrctions for Box i on Forms
11 W-2 and W-3 ("Include the following ... (3) Total tips reported by the employee to the
12 employer (not allocated tips)."). If STARUCKS's "imputed" tips are "allocated" tips,
4 ~
16 the employees' W-2S, not in Box 8
15 STARUCKS reported all of its imputed tips with the employees' wages in Box 1 of
17 STARBUCKS did not report any allocated tips for the Class members, the only way it
19 "estimated" tips. As discused in furter detail below, STARUCKS did not follow the
20 proper procedures to report estimated tips for its employees. More importntly,
JON M. EGAN. PC
EXHIBIT 1
Page 12 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 13 of 70
Page ID#: 24
1 18.
2 Under certin circumstances, an employer is allowed to estimate the amount of
3 tips that its employees will report, and then withhold federal income taes based on
11 tips that STARUCKS "imputed" to them, and STARBUCKS was never required by
12 law to withhold those taes. These deductions for federal income taes are therefore
4 ~
17 estimating tips for purposes of
15 STARUCKS also didn't follow the required procedures to estimate tips, so its
16 deductions from Plaintiffs' paychecks were not authoried by law, either. When
withholding
18 allowed to estimate the amount of tips each employee will report during a given
19 calendar quarter. See 26 CFR 3L.3402(h)(1)-1(b)(1) ("(A)n employer may, at his
23 faith estimate that those same employees will report those tips.
Page 12 - CLASS ACTION COMPLANT
JON M. EGAN. PC 24 SlXll StREET
EXHIBIT 1
Page 13 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 14 of 70
Page ID#: 25
1 20.
2 STARUCKS also always "imputed" the same amount of tips to each and every
5 amount of tips that will be reported ... by the employee to the employer in a calendar
6 quarter."). !f all affected employees share substntially the same circumstances and
7 working conditions, an employer is allowed to use the same initial estimate for all of
8 them, but that estimate is supposed to be individually revied for each employee after
9 their first quarter of reported tips. 26 CFR 31.3402(h)1-1(b)(2)(ii) ("If the quarterly
11 from the amount of tips reported by the employee, ... the employer shall make an
12 appropriate adjustment of his estimate of the amount of tips that will be reported by
18 making its tip estimates and its reasons for believing that the estimates were
19 reasonable. 26 CFR 31.3402(h)1-1(b)(2)(iii). ("The employer must be prepared,
20 upon request ... to disclose the factors upon which he relied in making the estimate,
21 and his reaons for believing that the estimate is reasonable.") STARBUCKS never
22 produced any.
23 III
Page 13 - CLAS AClION COMPLANT
JON M. EGAN. PC
EXHIBIT 1
Page 14 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 15 of 70
Page ID#: 26
1 21.
2 Tips ofless than $20 in a calendar month are not considered "wages" for federal
4 working less than 40 hours in a given calendar month should not have federal income
5 taes withheld from their paycheck for that month (at the rate of 50q: of "imputed"
6 tips per hour, $20 in tips would equate to 40 hours for the month). "While $20 in
7 tips per month is not very much, employees who start employment, leave
8 employment, or take vacation or sick leave within a partcular month may well earn
9 less than that." Fior D1talia, Inc. v. United States, 242 F.3d 844, 847 n.5 (9th Cir.
10 2001). STARBUCKS withholds the same federa income taes from its employee'
11 paychecks for "imputed" tips whether or not those employees actually receive $20 in
15 22.
17 FICA taes on tip amounts that its employees report in wrting that they have
18 specifically received. "An employer is required to collect employee ta on tips which
19 constitute wages only in respect of those tips which are reported by the employee to
20 the employer in a wrtten statement furnished to the employer pursuant to section
21 6053(a)." 26 CFR 31.3102-3(a)(2). See IRS Chief Counsel Advice 200929004,
22 7/17/09 (holding that when employees distrbute tip jar tips amongst themselves, any
23 unreported tips are not subject to the employer share of FICA ta unles and unti the
240 SIXTH STREE OR 97034.2931 1lUPIlONE: (503) 697-3427' FAX: (866) 3 i 1-5629
LAKE OSWEG.
l1QjEOANLEGALTEAM.COM
EXHIBIT 1
Page 15 of70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 16 of 70
Page ID#: 27
1 IRS makes a notice and demand for the taes from the company). For an employer to
2 deduct taes based on a tip statement, it "must be signed by the employee and must
3 disclose: (i) The name, address, and social security number of the employee. (ii) The
4 name and address of the employer. (iii) The period for which, and the date on which,
5 the statement is furnished. If the statement is for a period ofless than 1 calendar
6 month, the beginning and ending dates of the period must be included (for example,
7 January 1 through January 8, 1998). (iv) The total amount of
8 employee during the period covered by the statement which are required to be
9 reported to the employer (see paragraph (a) ofthis section)." 26 CFR 31.6053-
10 1(b )(1). But ST ARUCKS did not base its FICA withholding on any statutorily valid
11 tip statements. Plaintiffs never signed any paper tip statements at all. Before filing
12 this lawsuit, Plaintiffs requested 26 CFR 31.6053-1(d)(4) hard copies of any and all
13 tip statements that STARBUCKS claims entitled or required it to withhold federal
14 FICA taes from wages for tips they received and reported. No such tip statements
~ 23.
15 were ever provided.
17 Employers are alowed to use an electronic system for employees to report tips,
18 but that system "must ensure that the information received is the information
19 trsmitted by the employee and must document all occaions of access that result in
20 the transmission of a tip statement. In addition, the design and operation of the
21 electronic system, including access procedures, must make it reaonably certin that
22 the person accessing the system and transmittng the statement is the employee
23 identified in the statement trnsmitted." 26 CFR 31.6053-1(d)(i). An employer
Page 15 - CLASS ACTION COMPLANT
JON M. EGAN. PC
EXHIBIT 1
Page 16 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 17 of 70
Page ID#: 28
1 cannot deduct FICA taxes based on an electronic tip statement unless it provides the
2 same information as a paper tip statement, and it must be signed by the employee.
3 26 CFR 3l.6053-1(d)(2)-(3). "The electronic signature must identify the employee
4 transmittng the electronic tip statement and must authenticate and verify the
5 transmission. For this purpose, the terms authenticate and verif have the same
9 ~
12 required it to withhold FICA taes from wages for tips they received and reported. No
~ 25.
18 employer may, at his discretion, (withhold the applicable ta) in respect of tips
IN~EGANLEGALTEAM.COM
EXHIBIT 1
Page 17 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 18 of 70
Page ID#: 29
4 ~
3 Oregon law.
5 STARUCKS also didn't follow the required procedures to estimate tips, so its
6 deductions from Plaintiff' paychecks were not authoried by law, either. When
7 estimating tips for purposes of witholding FICA taes, employers are only allowed to
8 estimate the amount of tips each employee will report during a given calendar
9 quarter. See 26 CFR 31.3102-3(c)(I) ("(A)n employer may, at his discretion,
14 27.
15 STARUCKS also always "imputed" the same amount of 17 CFR 3L.3102-3(c)(1)(i) ("In respect of each employee, make an estimate of
13 faith estimate that those same employees will report those tips.
the
18 amount of tips that will be reported ... by the employee to the employer in a calendar
19 quarter."). If all affected employee share substantially the same circumstances and
20 working conditions, an employer is allowed to use the same initial estimate for all of
21 them, but that estimate is supposed to be individually revied for each employee after
22 their first quarter of
EXHIBIT 1
Page 18 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 19 of 70
Page ID#: 30
1 from the amount of tips reported by the employee, ... the employer shall make an
2 appropriate adjustment of his estimate of the amount of tips that will be reported by 3 the employee. "). Plaintiff never reported any tips to STARBUCKS (per
their first quarters of 4 STARUCKS's own instrctions), so after each of
work,
S STARBUCKS should not have been "estimating" any tips for them whatsoever. Before
6 this litigation was filed, Plaintiffs requested that STARUCKS produce copies of any
7 tip report that they ever submitted, as well as the factors upon which it relied in
8 making its tip estimates and its reasons for believing that the estimates were
9 reasonable. 26 CFR 3L.3102-3(C)(2)(iii). ("The employer must be prepared, upon
10 request ... to disclose the factors upon which he relied in making the estimate, and his
11 reasons for believing that the estimate is reasonable." STARBUCKS never produced
13 28.
12 any.
14 Tips ofless than $20 in a calendar month are not considered "wages" for FICA
15 withholding. 26 CFR 31.3121(a)(12)-I(b). That means that any employee working
16 less than 40 hours in a given calendar month should not have FICA taes withheld
17 from their paycheck for that month (at the rate of soc of "imputed" tips per hour,
18 $20 in tips would equate to 40 hours for the month). "While $20 in tips per month is
19 not very much, employees who start employment, leave employment, or
take
20 vacation or sick leave within a partcular month may well earn less than that." Fior
21 D'Italia, Inc. v. United States, 242 F.3d 844, 847 n.s (9th Cir. 2001). STARUCKS
22 withholds the same FICA taes from its employees' paychecks for "imputed" tips
23 whether or not those employees actually receive $20 in tips in a given calendar
EXHIBIT 1
Page 19 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 20 of 70
Page ID#: 31
1 month.
2
3 Potential Additional Violation (Information and Beliet)-
5 29.
6 The Workers' Benefit Fund is a program that provides various benefits to workers
7 injured on the job in Oregon. The program is funded by an assessment that every
8 employer and employee pays to the State of Oregon, based on the number of
hours
9 worked by that employee. The assessment rate is a number of cents for each hour
10 worked by the employee, split evenly between the employee and the employer. Since
11 2007, for example, the assessment rate has been 2.8~ per hour, with the employer
13 30.
12 paying 1.4~ per hour and the employee paying L.4(\ per hour.
14 In the first two pay periods of Hannah Fredrickson's employment, she had too
15 much money withheld from her paycheck for the Oregon Workers' Benefit Fund
20 3L
Page 19 - CLASS ACTION COMPLANT
JON M. EGAN. PC
EXHIBIT 1
Page 20 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 21 of 70
Page ID#: 32
1 something to do with the tips imputed to Ms. Fredrickson. Al we know now is that
2 STARUCKS set up its computer system to allow that to happen; we won't know
3 whether it did the same thing to other Plaintiffs and class members until we have
8 3~
11 counted as part of
9 Oregon law requires employers to pay for aU breaks tht are shorter than 30
10 minutes. Break shorter than 30 minutes are considered "rest periods," and they are
hours worked. A bona fide "meal period" is an uninterrpted
12 period of 30 minutes or more, where an employee does no work and has time to eat a
4 33.
13 full meaL. Bona fide meal periods are not counted as part of
hours worked.
18 allow that to happen; we won't know whether it did the same thing to other Plaintiffs
19 and class members until we have obtained furter discovery on this issue (though
EXHIBIT 1
Page 21 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 22 of 70
Page ID#: 33
2 U
7
1 CLA ALLEGATIONS
5 seek to represent is all current and former Oregon employees of STARUCKS who
6 reported or were imputed tips.
8 NUEROSIT
9 35.
11 that the class will potentially include hundreds or even thousands of employees.
12 STARUCKS's web site indicates that there are over 100 STARUCKS locations in
13 Oregon.
14
16 '36.
15 COMMONALIT
17 There are questions of law and fact common to the Class, which predominate over
18 any isues involving only individual class members. The principal questions include
19 whether tips (imputed or not) are "wages" for purposes of Oregon withholding law,
20 whether cah tips collected and distrbuted strctly according to an employer's wrtten
21 policies but never handled or counted by the employer or its managers count as being
23 whether the deduction of Oregon income taes from employees' paychecks for tips is
EXHIBIT 1
Page 22 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 23 of 70
Page ID#: 34
1 contrary to Oregon law, whether such deduction is willfl as that term is defined in
2 Oregon law, whether the tips that STARB UCKS "imputes" to the employees are
3 "allocated" tips or "estimated" tips, whether STARBUCKS violates ORS 652.610(1) by
4 jumbling and combining wage and tip taes on the employees' pay stubs, whether
5 STARUCKS and/or its individual locations meet the definition oflarge food and
6 beverage establishment, whether STARUCKS follows the requirements to report
7 estimated tips to the government for its employees, whether STARBUCKS is
8 "required" to withhold federal income and FICA taes from the taxes it imputes to the
9 employees, whether the deduction of an amount for taes that is under some
10 circumstances allowed (but not required) by federallaw violates ORS 652.610(3) and
11 (for all of
12 employees.
14 lYPICALI1
13
15 37.
17 a. Plaintiffs are members of
16 Plaintiffs' claims are tyical of those of the other Class members because:
the Class.
18 b. Plaintiffs' claims stem from the same practice or course of conduct that forms
the Class members' claims are based on the same facts and legal theories.
23 by statute.
Page 22 - CLAS AClION COMPLANT
JONM.EGAN.PC
EXHIBIT 1
Page 23 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 24 of 70
Page ID#: 35
e. The injuries that Plaintiffs suffered are similar to the injuries that the Clas
members suffered, and they are relatively small compared to the expense and
burden of individual prosecutions of this litigation.
4
5
f. The prosecution of separate actions by the Class members could either result in
6
7
8 9
10
11
Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests of
12
13
members.
b. Plaintiffs have retained counsel experienced in handling wage-and-hour class
actions, who has already devoted substantial time and resources to
14
15
16
17
investigating the Class members' claims and will vigorously prosecute this
litigation.
18
c. Plaintiffs' claims are tyical of the claims of Class members in that their claims
19
stem from the same practice and course of conduct that forms the basis of the
Class claims.
20
21
III III
III
22
23
l1lXGANLEGALTEAM.COM
EXHIBIT 1
Page 24 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 25 of 70
Page ID#: 36
2 39.
3 A class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and effcient
4 adjudication of the controversy, for at least the following reasons:
9 litigation due to the relatively small size of most claims and because the named
10 Plaintiffs and their attorney will vigorously pursue the claims on behalf of the
11 class members;
12 c. No other similar litigation has been commenced, but if commenced, it can be
19 PRELmGATION NOTICE
20 Long before this lawsuit was filed, Plaintiffs' counsel exchanged numerous
21 documents and correspondence with STARUCKS's counseL. More than 30 days
22 prior to their filing this lawsuit, Plaintiffs served the prelitigation notice attched
23 hereto as Exhibit A (which includes the proofs of delivery). Plaintiffs' counsel and
24 sixm SlRET
LAKE OSWEGO. OR 97034-2931
1lLEPHONE: (503) 697-3427 . FAX: (866) 311-5629 INO(EGANLEGALTEAM.COM
EXHIBIT 1
Page 25 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 26 of 70
Page ID#: 37
4 cessation. Exhibit A satifies any and all prelitigation notice requirements in this
5 case, whether contained in ORS 652.150, ORS 652.200, ORCP 32H or otherwse.
9 40. 11 ~ 15 42.
12 Pursuant to ORS 653.025, ST AR UCKS was required to pay Plaintiff and the
13 Class members at least the amount of the applicable Oregon minimum wage, when
16 For such violation(s), Plaintiffs and the Class members are entitled to collect the
17 difference between their wages received when due and the Oregon minimum wages
18 due in an amount to be proven at trial, together with attorney fees and costs, as well
19 as pre- and post-judgment interest and the 30 days of statutory penalty wages
20 provided by ORS 653.055 and 652.150.
EXHIBIT 1
Page 26 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 27 of 70
Page ID#: 38
3 ~. 5 #
9 to do
10 45.
so.
11 For such violation(s), Plaintiffs and the Class members are entitled to collect the
12 difference between the wages received when due and the overtme wages due in an
13 amount to be proven at tral, together with attorney fees and costs, as well as pre- and
14 post-judgment interest and the 30 days of statutory penalty wages provided by ORS
15 653.055 and 652.150.
16
19 46. ~ ~
22 Pursuant to ORS 652.140, STARUCKS was required to pay Plaintiffs and the
23 Class members all wages due by the statutory deadline upon termination of their
EXHIBIT 1
Page 27 of
70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 28 of 70
Page ID#: 39
2 ~
7
3 For such violation(s)~ Plaintiffs and the Class members are entitled to collect all
4 wages remaining due, in an amount to be proven at tral together with attorney fees
5 and costs, as well as pre- and post-judgment interest7 and the 30 days of statutory
6 penalty wages provided by ORS 652.150 and ORS 652.200.
10 49. 12 50. ~ 5L
19
14 amounts from the paychecks of Plaintiff and the Class members but willfully did so.
16 For such violation(s), Plaintiffs and the Class members are entitled to the greater
22 52.
Pa~ 27 - CLASS ACTON COMPUUNT
JON M. EGAN, p
EXHIBIT 1
Page 28 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 29 of 70
Page ID#: 40
1 53. 5 ~
4 so.
9
3 Class members all wages due, when those wages were due, but willfully failed to do
6 For such violation(s), Plaintiffs and the Class members are entitled to collect the
7 wages due (if any) in an amount to be proven at trial, together with attorney fees and
8 costs, as well as pre- and post-judgment interest per ORS 652.200.
16 future paychecks for any tips whatsoever (whether "imputed" or otherwse); enjoin
19 such damages as set fort above and in amounts to be proven at tral; award the
20 attorney fees, costs and expenses of suit of Plaintiff and the other Class members;
EXHIBIT 1
Page 29 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 30 of 70
Page ID#: 41
1 JURY
DEMD
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 23
JON M. EGAN. p
EXHIBIT 1
Page 30 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 31 of 70
Page ID#: 42
Exhibit A to Complaint
Fredrickson et al. v. Starbucks Corporation
21 total pages in Exhibit A
Pa2es
1-8
9 10
11
Document
November 6,2012 Prelitigation Notice
12 1~ 14 15 16 17 18 19
November 6, 2012 fax cover sheet for same November 6, 2012 fax confirmation sheet for same November 6, 2012 cover email for same November 7, 2012 email read receipt for same November 6, 2012 Certfied Mail Receipt ending 5036 November 7, 2012 US Post Offce Track & Confirm ending 5036
November 7, 2012 Return Receipt ending 5036
November 6, 2012 Certfied Mail Receipt ending 8685 November 7, 2012 US Post Offce Track & Confirm ending 8685
November 7, 2012 Return Receipt ending 8685
20
21
November 6,2012 Certified Mail Receipt ending 8692 November 8, 2012 US Post Offce Track & Confirm ending 8692
November 8, 2012 Return Receipt ending 8692
JON M. EGAN. PC
EXHIBIT 1
Page 31 of 70
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 32 of 70
Page ID#: 43
Jeganteganlegalteam.com
ww.egnlegalteam.com
Starbucks Corporation Starbucks Corporation c/o Prentice-Hall Corporation System, Inc. 2401 Utah Ave. S., Ste. 800 Registered Agent MSS-LA1 285 Libert St. NE Seattle, WA 98134 Receipt No. 7008 2810 0001 1032 8692 Salem, OR 97301
Receipt No. 7008 2810 0001 1032 8685
Portand, OR 97201
ChritIetotten~dwt.com
Receipt No. 7008 0150 0003 2549 S036
Re: Hannah Fredrickson, Ashley Krening and Maurialee Bracke v. 8tarbucks Corporation
Nonpayment, ORS 652.200 Written Notice ofa ORS 652.150 Written Notice of Wage Claim, ORCP 32H Notice of Alleged Causes of Action and Demand for Correction or Rectification of Aleged Wrongs, and Spoliation Notice
Dear Ms. Totten and Starbucks Corporation:
I write to give wrtten notice of non payment and written notice of a wage claim on behalf of my clients (Hannah Fredrickson, Ashley Krening and Maurialee Bracke) and the various respective class and subclass members who share their situation, and to give rectification ORCP 32H notice of alleged causes of action and demand for correction or of alleged wrongs. In order to more fully elucidate the issues, this letter begins by
addressing the claims in Ms. Totten's May 23, 2012 letter (copy enclosed), after which
First, Ms. Totten claims in her letter (without citing any basis) that Starbucks is "excepted" from the definition oflarge food and beverage establishments (and therefore the requirement to allocate tips). I see no applicable exception in the statute or regulations. What is the basis for the claimed exception?
Second, Ms. Totten did not address Oregon law and its prohibition against withholding Oregon taxes from tips. Oregon law does not allow any withholding from tips received
direcly from customers. ORS 316.162 defines wages for witholding purposes as "remuneration for servces performed by an employee for an employer." The language of
states that, "Tips are not treated as Wages since they are not subject to withholding
under ORS Chapter 316." And the Oregon Department of Revenue's Frequently Asked
Exibit Page 1 of
A
21
Exhibit 1 - 32
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 33 of 70
Page ID#: 44
Page20fs
clearly states, "8. How does Oregon treat withholdig on tip income? Tips paid
by the customer to the employee are not subject to withholding tax. Tips paid by the
customer to the employer who then distributes them to the employees are subject to withholding.". All of the subject tips were paid directly by the customers to the
employees. Furter, "wages" are defined identically in the unemployment benefits
statute (ORS 657.105), and the Oregon Court of Appeals has affrmed the Employment Appels Board's fiding that, as stated in the Oregon Administrtive Rules, "Gifts, tips, or other gratuities received by an employee during the course of his employment from
persons other than his employer are not wages." Callahan v. Employment Div., 80 Or.
App. 401, 403, 722 P.2d 1275,1276 review denied, 302 Or.
The deduction of Oregon income taxes from the employees' tips (both "imputed" and
otherwse) was therefore ilegal under Oregon law. ORS 652.610(3).
Third, Ms. Totten attempted to classify Starbucks's "imputed" tips as "estimated" tips under 26 CFR 31.3402(h)(i)-I(b), not "allocated" tips. Nice tr.
The fact that Starbucks reported employees' "imputed" tips in box 1 of their W-2S is not evidence of anyting except a(nother) violation offederal law. Only tips specifically
reported to the employer by the employee are supposed to be included with wages in
remuneration in the form the W-2. 26 CFR 31.6051-i(a)(1)(vi) ("In the cae of of tips received by an employee in the course of his employment, the amounts required to be shown by paragraphs (3) and (5) of section 6051(a) (see paragraph (a)(I)(i)(C) and
box 1 of
(e) of this section) shall include only such tips as are reported by the employee to the employer in a wrtten statement furnished to the employer pursuant to section 6053(a).''). See also Instructions for Forms W-2 and W-3 ("Include the following ... (3)
Total tips reported by the employee to the employer (not allocated tips). ").
withholding FICA and federal income taxes, employers are only allowed to estimate the amount of tips each employee will report during a given calendar quarter. See 26 CFR 3L.3102-3(c)(1), 31.3402(h)(i)-I(b)(i) ("(A)n employer tips reported by an may, at his discretion, (withhold the applicable tax) in respect of
Similarly, for purposes of
good faith estimate that those same employees will report those tips.
Moreover, Starbucks has "imputed" the same amount of tips to each and every employee throughout the statute of limitations period, whereas it is supposed to estimate each employee's tip reporting separately. 26 CFR 3L.3i02-3(c)(I)(i), 31.3402(h)(i)l(b)(l)(i) ("In respect of each employee, make an estimate of the amount of tips that will be reported ... by the employee to the employer in a calendar quarer."). If all afected employees share substantially the same circumstances and working conditions, the employer can use the same initial estimate for all of them, but that estimate is supposed to be revised after each employee's first quarter of reported tips. 26 CFR
the quarterly estimate of tips in 31.3102-3(c)(2)(ii), 3i.3402(h)I-1(b)(2)(ii) ("If respect to a partcular employee continues to differ substantially from the amount of
tips reported by the employee, ... the employer shall make an appropriate adjustment of
his estimate of the amount of tips that Will be reported by the employee."). My clients
never reported any tips to Starbuks (per Starbucks's own instructions), so after their
first quarers, Starbucks should not have been "estimating" any tips for them
Exibit Page 2 of
A
21
Exhibit 1 ., 33
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 34 of 70
Page ID#: 45
Page
3 ofS
whatsoever. "The employer must be prepared, upon request ... to disclose the factors
upon which he relied in making the estimate, and his reasons for believing that the
estimate is reasonable." 26 CFR 3L.3lO2-3(c)(2)(iii).
Furter, tips ofless than $20 in a calendar month are not "wages" for the purposes of
federal withholding law. 26 CFR 3l.3121(a)(12)-1(b), 26 CFR 31.340i(a)(i6)-i(b).
That means that any employee working less than 40 hours in a given calendar month
should not have FICA or federal income taxes withheld from their paycheck for that month. "While $20 in tips per month is not very much, employees who start employment, leave employment, or take vacation or sick leave within a partcular month may well earn less than that." For D'Itala, Inc. v. United States, 242 F.3d 844, 847 n.s (9th Cir. 2001). Starbucks withholds the same taxes from its employees' "imputed" tips
whether or not those employees actually receive $20 in tips in a given calendar month.
Next, Starbucks did not base its witholding on any statutorily valid tip statements. Tip
statements "must be signed by the employee and must disclose: (i) The name, address,
and social security number of the employee. () The name and address of the employer. (iii) The period for which, and the date on which, the statement is furnished. If the statement is for a period of less than i calendar month, the beginning and ending dates of the period must be included (for example, January 1 through Januar 8, 1998). (iv) The total amount of tips received by the employee during the period covered:by the
statement which are required to be reported to the employer (see paragraph (a) of this
statement must provide the same information as a paper tip statement, and it must be signed by the employee. 26 CFR 3i.6053-i(d)(2)-(3). "The electronic signature must identify the employee transmitting the electronic tip statement and must authenticate and verify the transmission. For this purpose, the terms authenticate and veri have the same meanings as they do when applied to a written signature on a paper tip statement." 26 CFR 3i.6053-1(d)(3) (italics in original). Please provide me with
any and all electronic tip statements that 26 CFR 3i.6053-i(d)(4) hard copies of Starbucks claims entitled or required it to withhold taes from wages for tips my clients
received and reported, or upon which Starbucks based any estimate of such tips. See
also 26 CFR 3i.3102-3(c)(2)(ii) and 26 CFR 31.3402(h)1-2(iii) (''The
employer must
be prepared, upon request ... , to disclose the factors upon which he relied in makig the estimate, and his reasons for believing that the estimate is reasonable. ")
Most importntly of all, even if Starbucks were validly estimating its employees' quarterly tips, an employer is never required to withold on estimated tips. "An
employer is required to collect employee tax on tips which constitute wages only in
respect of those tips which are reported by the employee to the employer in a written
Exibit Page 3 of
A
21
Exhibit 1 - 34
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 35 of 70
Page ID#: 46
Page
4 oiS
statement furnished to the employer pursuant to section 6053(a)." 26 CFR 31.3102-3(a)(2), 3L.3402(k)-I(a)(2). See IRS Chief Counsel Advice 200929004, 7/17/09
(holding, in response to an inquiry alleging facts suspiciously identical to those in our cae, that when employees distribute tip jar tips amongst themselves, any unreported
tips are not subject to the employer share of FICA tax unless and until the IRS makes a notice and demand for the taxes from the company). ORS 652.610(3) prohibits any deductions except for amounts authorized by the employee in writing or "required to. do
so by law" (emphasis added). My clients did not authorize the withholding oftaxes from withhold those taxes. The deductions for FICA and federal income taxes are therefore ilegal under Oregon
their "imputed" tips, and Starbucks was not required by law to.
law.
Please consider this letter my clients' ORS 652.1S0 wrtten notice of nonpayment and my ORS 652.200 written notice of their wage claims and ORCP 32H notice of alleged
causes of action and demand of correction or rectification of alleged wrongs. Ms. Totten represented Starbucks in Hannah Fredrickson's Unfair Labor Practice claim (Case No.
36-CA-I080S), and she confirmed in her November 2, 2011 letter that her offce is acting as Starbucks's agent for purposes of receivig prelitigation notices and written requests
regarding wage-and-hour issues as well. In keeping with the requirements of ORCP business and registered 32H(2), I have copied this letter to Starbucks's principal place of
agent as currently lited with Oregon's Secretary of State. Because the violations were
system-wide, and to avoid any unnecessary disruption of Starbucks's business, I have not sent this notice to the individual store managers or physical locations throughout the state. Please let me know immediately if Starbucks does not consider this letter to have completely fulfied Plaintiff' prelitigation notice obligations under ORCP 32H; if you do so, I will immediately forward additional copies of this notice to various
additional locations and individuals as necessary.
Demand
My clients hereby demand that Starbucks immediately cease and desist withholding and/or deducting amounts for federal taxes from its employees' paychecks based upon amounts of tips "imputed" to them, and immediately cease and desist withholding
and/or deducting amounts for Oregon taxes from its Oregon employees' paychecks
My clients furter hereby demand that Starbucks return to them and all other Starbucks employees and ex-employees who had Oregon taxes withheld or deducted from their
paychecks based upon tips for employment in Oregon at any time: all Oregon tax
amounts deducted or withheld from their paychecks based upon tips, along with all
applicable prejudgment interest.
My clients furter demand that Starbucks return to them and all other Starbucks employees and ex-employees who had federal taxes withheld or deducted from their
paychecks based upon amounts of tips "imputed" to them by Starbucks at any time: all
federal tax amounts deducted or withheld from their paychecks based upon amounts of tips "imputed" to them by Starbucks, along with all applicable prejudgment interest.
Finally, my clients demand that Starbucks pay them and all other Starbucks employees and ex-employees who had taxes withheld or deducted from their paychecks based upon
Exibit Page 4 of
A
21
Exhibit 1 - 35
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 36 of 70
Page ID#: 47
Pages ofS
tips (whether "imputed" to them by Starbucks or not) for employment in Oregon at any
time: statutory damages of $200.00 per paycheck for every pay period in which such
deductions were made (ORS 652.615); 240 hours of penalty wages, at their final hourly pay rate, for each employee whom any such deduction droppe below the thenapplicable Oregon minimum wage (ORS 653.055 and 652.150); 240 hours of penalty wages, at their final hourly pay rate, for each employee who experienced such a
deducton in any week in which the employee worked more than 40 hours (ORS 653.055
and 652.150); and 240 hours of penalty wages, at their final hourly pay rate, for each
employee whose employment has terminated at any time after such a deduction (ORS 652.150); along with all prejudgment interest applicable to each of these categories of damages.
Please make all checks payable to "Jon M. Egan, PC IOLTA Account."
Spoliation Notice
This will also remind you of Starbucks's duty under state and federal
law to immediately
institute a litigation hold, preservng any and all evdence that may be relevant to this
action in both physical and native electronic format. This includes, but is not limited to, for every employee in Oregon: all time sheets or other records of hours worked, all
employee handbooks and other policy documents, all records of pay and any amounts deducted or withheld therefrom, all paper or electonic tip statements, and all
documents forming the basis for Starbucks's "estimates" of the employees' tips, as well
as all internal or external memoranda or paper or electronic correspondence regarding any discussions, planning, communications, implementation or decision-making processes involving the imputation of tips to Starbucks employees; and any and all other
documents or other evidence that is or may be relevant to this action. This duty extends
to all documents, data and tangible things in Starbucks's possession, custody or control, and any employees, agents, contractors, carriers, bailees or other nonparties who possess such documents, data or tangible things.
I look foiward to working with you to resolve this matter as justly, speedily and as possible. If Starbucks would like to discuss resolution of this matter prior to my institutig litigation (or at any time thereafter), please let me know.
inexpensively Thank
you.
Sincerely,
JME/ml
EneL.
Exibit
Page S'Of21
Exhibit 1 -36
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 37 of 70
Suite
Page ID#: 48
Christie S. Tottci
503-nS-5298 tel
ChrisreidWl.om
May 23,2012
JonM.Egan
Jon M. Egan, PC
240 Six S1.
I wrte to follow up on your question regarding Imputed Tip Income on your client's pay records. As you know, you asked me to explain the basis for Stabucks' use of a 50-cents-per-hour rate. When we spoke by telephone, you clarfied that you were trg to determne whether Stabucks was makng an unawf witholding from tip income. When I fuer asked for the law upon which you relied, you sent me citations to varous soures regardig witholdings from allocated tips.
In fact, Stabucks does not allocate tips. (It is excepted from the definition of establishment" and therefore not required to fie Form 8027.) You can confirm this yourself
"Box 8" on your client's Form W-2. Because Starbucks doe not allocate tips, the varous sources you cite regarding alocations are irelevant.
Allocting tips is a different concept than imputing tips. For your reference, I am attchig languge from Stabucks' Parer Resources Manua that more fully explains imput tips. Stabucks' practice ofimput-
ing tips is wholly lawfl and appropriate. See e.g. 26 CFR 3L.3402(h)(1)-1(b). In addition to that witholding, of course, your client fuher had a legal obligation to accurately report her tips and pay income taxes on tips eared in excess of 50 cents per hour.
Anchora
LoAng
inO....ilG)
BelllM
I NGYork SlFnl8o
Pola
Shnghai
I Wesinglon. Set1le D.C.
ww.dwtcom
A Page 6 Of21
Exibit
Exhibit 1 -37
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 38 of 70
Page ID#: 49
JonM.Egan
Re: Srbucks~redric~on May 23, 2012 2 Page
I trst this infonnation addresses your concerns and clarfies that SIabucks' practice of proper. Pleae feel fr to contact me if
imputing tips is
Sincerely,
~~~
Chrstie S. Totten
CST:ss
Enclosure
cc: Client
Exibit
Page 7 Of2~
Exhibit 1-38
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 39 of 70
Page ID#: 50
Pay I
Understanding
Imputed Tips
Federa
law requires that all U.S. parers who receive tips report tip income to
Stabucks. To assist parters in meetng their tip reportng responsbilites and help
ensure they receive Socia Secunty and other benefits, to which they are entitled on
their tips, Staucks imputes tip income at
report this amoun to the Internal Revenue Servce (IR) on the parters' behaf
This relieves each parer of his or her responsibilty to report ths amoWlt. Parers
ar only responsible for reportg tips if
the paycheck stb. The "Report Tips" line breaks down tips report forile
tips would normally be received by parers. Accordingly, all paid leave including
holiday, vacon, personal days, sick tie, juiy dut and bereavemen as well as
business.
This pro is in plac to exclude only those stores where parers averae less th
$0.50 per hour in eared tips.
1. The distct manager and stre manager detnnine the case oftl stre's
lower than average hourly tip ra.
2. If it is detennined that the stre has ben under the averae for four
consecutive weeks, the DM must complete the Store Tip Exclusion Fonn, have it signed by his or her regonal directr and submit it to the Corp Tax deparent, mailstop S- TAX, for approval. This form can be foun on
the stre's tip aveia has reached the $0.50 perhourminmwn, the stre
the 12th week. Ifnot, the wil be set up to have tip income imputed afr Tax depaent will work with the DM to contiue the exemption.
4. Store paers in the excluded stres must report any ac tips received
000204
Exhibit Page 8 of
4.9
A
21
Exhibit 1 -49
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 40 of 70
Page ID#: 51
Jon M. Egan, PC
FACSIMILE
Name: Organization: Fax: Date: Subject:
ww.egnlegalteam.com
TRANSM ITTAL
Christie Totten
Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP
Pages:
Comments:
Exhibit Page 9 of
A
21
Exhibit 1 -40
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 41 of 70
Page ID#: 52
ue i
fv10n
tor Report
Loca i Name
Company Logo
..on M. Ega n. PC
..on M. Egan. PC
5037785.299
11-06;19:38
Contents
Resu I 't
Done
sent.
Li o.wi", OR 87llM1
240 Sbd si
. Jon M. Egan, PC
FACSIM rI.E
Jenieco _.~ii""
taml (ee) 311_0
Ill (601617-M7
TRANSMITTAL
Oiiztion:
Name:
Novembur 6. 2012
Acton and Demand for Corron or Rectfication of Aleg Wrongi, and Spllation Noti
Pages:
9 (Incldi ti page)
Comments:
Exibit Page 10 of
A
21
Exhibit 1 -41
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 42 of 70
Page ID#: 53
From: To:
Michle Lauzier
Christe Tottn
Jon M. Egan
ec:
Subjec:
Date:
Attchments:
Please see attached correspondence from Mr. Egan, which was also sent to you today by facsimile and Certfied u.s. Mail, Retun Receipt Requested.
Thank
you.
Jon M. Egan, PC 240 Sixth Street Lake Oswego, OR 97034-2931 (503) 697-3427 tel.
(866) 311-5629 fax
ww.eganlegalteam.com
Exibit Page 11 of
A
21
Exhibit 1 - 42
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 43 of 70
Page ID#: 54
From: To:
Totten, Christe
M Ichle Layzjer
Subjec:
Date:
Your mesge To: Totten, Chrlste
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 6:58: 17 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacic Time (US & canada)
was red on Wednesay, November 07, 2012 10:08:51 AM (UTC-08:00) Padflc Time (US & canada).
Exibit
Page 12 of 21
Exhibit 1 -43
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 44 of 70
Page ID#: 55
: ..
~ II
. ~ ti (
0. 8
..~ .. .
Q) -
'ill ...
ern
. Ql
E lIo
c i- Cl
lI~~
i- .giLL c:
~ ~ I I i
60 ~~
.e.~ 8
.!!;:~'g .. II .! .
li:~ii
.'
Exbit Page 13 of
A
21
Exhibit 1 - 44
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
1118/12
English
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 45 of 70
Page ID#: 56
ilUSPS.COM.
Quick Tools
ShIp a ?ackage
Send Mall
Shop
Buslnus SolutIons
PRINT OET~LS
SERVICE
STAIS OF YOUR ITEM
FEAlURES
. First.aass Mai~
A"ocessed at USPS
. Certfied Mail'"
. Return leipt
: Dspatched to Sort
flvelTr 06,2012,3:33 pm LAKE OS, OR
97034
: Facill
; Acceptance
LmAL
A"ivacy Policy) Terms of Use )
ONUSPS.COM
ON ABOUr.USPS.COM
Abou! USPS H:rr ,
Newsroom)
Mlil Service Updates)
Forms & Pubcalions ,
Inspector General,
Custorrr Service )
S~e Index)
Postal Ex plore, ,
Careers)
..: ,'Jpr~ ~ II it/\) ,.\.J :..' i. ~":i."': i\ II l.d~'ii,., !~I ,','.r ....":
Exibit
A
1/1
hltps:fltools.usps.comlgolTrackConfirmAction.acton
Page 14 of 21
Exhibit 1 -45
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 46 of 70
Page ID#: 57
.....~url.~..:. . .~ . DO l. g! I
c; ~
LM .!
:i' . 'll'" :: N
.:.... "I 15 . Q. ..
:r '.' .41 ..;~ c i- g
8.
....;-1 c J' .
.1
U
II i
I1 ~ \' f
:lllij":l :~iu.~;
'. .. ~1i1i6 . 'C S; 8 'S
Exhibit
Page 15 of 21
Exhibit 1 -46
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
IQ
i: ..
(Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided)
LI
rr
c:
$1.30 $2.95
ru
sOli6l C I A L
Document 1-1
Po .
J
i: $2.35 i: (Eiic~~ i: SO.GO ,. i: ToI Po 6 F- $ l6.60 ru i: Starbucks Cororation i: c/o Prentice-all Corporation System. Inc., Registered Agent i: ~ 285 Liberty St. NE
,. ,. i:
Ci Fe
Filed 01/08/13
(=:~
Page 47 of 70
Salem, OR 97301
m~
'fr ~~ ;: 0' 9-
- cf
Page ID#: 58
~ 0 0-C' ... I I\ r-
...
~.. ~
-.
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
111e112
English
Customer Service
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 48 of 70
Page ID#: 59
Register I Sign In
6JUSPS.COM.
QuIck Tools
Search USPS.com or
Track Packages
Ship a Package
Send Mall
Shop
Builness Solutions
PRINT OET~LS
SERVice
DATE&nME
LOCAnON
FEAlURES
;0087.810000110321;685
. Rrst-Oass Mlir&
. Celiered
. Expected Dellvery~:
IIverrr 8, 2012
97301
97034
Faciit
Acceptnce
LAL
Pracy R:lby )
Terms of Use )
ONUSPS.COM
ON ABUT .USPS.COM
About liPS I-rr i
I\wsroomi
Mail Servbe Updates i
FQl )
li FEAR Act EE Data )
Custorrr Service i
S.e Index,
R:stal Explorer,
03reers,
, ;:.p-..i i:ili(f.' -'f i!.' i (~i~~. ,. i j..!;.!: il"', :;,.'.:., '1-., (". ~
Exibit
A
1/1
https:llools.uspS.comlgofTrackConfirmAction.aclion
Page 17 of 21
Exhibit 1 -48
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 49 of 70
Page ID#: 60
Ii
~ c
1
..
, :i.i.~, ~~ _. P1:~..-...I
, 11'.1 ~"ln61 . l~. Rui" ,1. l~~!l . 11 : ., .ii illl= ~iil~ ~ . .. .,l.g ~~l'l ~ l!" ri
.I~ ;!'l-', - ; ~ 1 ~; s; I i r
:i ji~i,l,lil. .. l g
fl!:~~$; . l 1-
Exhibit Page 18 of
A
21
Exhibit 1 -49
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
..
EO
ru
(Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided)
ir
Document 1-1
ru
siLFwSailC I A L
Po s
$1.30
c: c: Rl De Fe c: (Eidai..meill Re r"
EO
(E Re
$
Re RI Fe
ru
cO I Starbucks Cororation
Filed 01/08/13
Tai Pa & i: rs
Page 50 of 70
m ix ~
Page ID#: 61
:: Ot
o ~ 10
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
Document 1-1
Filed 01/08/13
Page 51 of 70
Page ID#: 62
English
Customer Service
USPS Mobile
Register J Sign In
j;USPS.COMQuick Tools
Search USPS.com or
Track Packages
Ship a Package
Send Mill
Shop
Buiin... Solutloni
LOCAnON
FEA RES
: Expected Delivery By;
Deliered
: SETTE, WA 98134
: N:errr 8,2012
, Qrt~ied Mai'"
: Rern Receipt
Processed at US
Orgin Sort Facil
Dspatched 10 Sort
; SEATTE, WA 98168
LAKE0S0,OR97034
LAKE 0S0, OR 97034
!
Facilit
Acceptance
LEGAL
ONUSPS.COM
ON ABUT.USPS.COM
About US l-rr ,
Privacy Policy)
Governrrnt services i
Buy St"lS & Shop'
TerlT of Use ,
FOIA ,
Nesroom,
Mail service Upates i
Forms & P.blications )
Custorrr service i
Site Index i
Postal Explorer,
Gareers)
Exibit Page 20 of
A
21
Exhibit 1 -51
Case 3:13-cv-00029-HU
.~~~~u~r
. Prnt yol' an ~. ti. th nJ
80 that WlCal'ro thc:an:ftoyo. i . . Ath this c: to th ba of th ma~ .
or on th
Document 1-1
1. Ai Ad to
Starucks Corporation
fr If spac pe !
MSS-LA1
. Seatle. WA 98134
a.
Filed 01/08/13
Page 52 of 70
2. Ai Ni .... h..h. ..' . '_h' . .. . (lfr.n li 71J IJ a 2 ailJ .JJI IJ 1 :L IJ 3 2 861:2., r'
4. Re e i Fe C Ye .."
o Ins Ma 0 C.O.D. .
C Re 0 Re Replfo ~Il
e. Ma.' C El Ma
m " X :
:: ~ ~
Page ID#: 63
Q: ~ 9-
- ...
~ S- .. ~ , ~ ~ I\