Plaintiff brought an FLSA collective action for minimum?? wages? ?and? ?overtime.?? The? ?plaintiff claimed he was subjected to a piecework no overtime wage system and denied overtime pay. The district court granted the employer?s 12(b)(6) motion because the complaint did not make factual allegations ?providing? an ?approximation ?of ?the hours worked, the plaintiff?s hourly wage or the amount of overtime owed. On appeal, the court held that Twombly/Iqbal do not require detailed? factual allegations regarding the number of overtime hours worked, but mere recitation of the statutory language is insufficient. Instead, ?a plaintiff asserting a claim for overtime payments must allege that she worked more than forty hours ?in? a ?given ?workweek? without ?being compensated for the overtime hours worked during that ?week.? ?Because? the? plaintiff? declined ?to amend his complaint in the district court, the panel simply affirmed the dismissal of the case. On reconsideration, the court eliminated from the opinion language suggesting that a ?given workweek? meant a ?specific workweek.? What a ?given workweek? means is not clear.

Landers v. Quality Communications, Inc., —- F.3d —- (9th Cir. 11/12/14; modified 1/26/15) (Rawlinson, Kleinfeld, Gilman (6th Cir.)).