(Fair Labor Standards Act Violations)   (Violations of Ohio Revised Code 4111.03)   16.  Defendant is a home health care business.    17.  Plaintiff Richard Wells has been employed by Defendant since November 2015.  4   18.  At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff has been employed by Defendant as a home  health aide.    19.  Other similarly-situated employees were employed by Defendant as home health  aides.   20.  Plaintiff and other similarly-situated home health aides were employed by  Defendant as non-exempt employees under the FLSA.    21.  Plaintiff and other similarly-situated home health aides were paid an hourly wage.  (Failure to Pay Overtime Compensation)   22.  Plaintiff and other similarly-situated home health aides worked more than 40  hours per week, but Defendant failed to pay them overtime compensation for the hours they  worked over 40 each workweek.   23.  Rather than paying overtime compensation, Plaintiff and other similarly-situated  home health aides were only paid straight time for the hours they worked over 40 each  workweek.   (Failure to Pay For All Hours Worked)   24.  Plaintiff brings Count One of this action on his own behalf pursuant to 29 U.S.C.  216(b),3 and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated who have been, are being, or will be  adversely affected by Defendant’s unlawful conduct.   24.  Plaintiff and other similarly-situated home health aides were paid by Defendant  for time spent at client appointments.   25.  The class which Plaintiff seeks to represent and for whom Plaintiff seeks the right  to send “opt-in” notices for purposes of the collective action, and of which Plaintiff is himself a  member, is composed of and defined as follows:  All current and former home health aides employed by Noor Home  Health Care LLC at any time between January 1, 2015 and the  3 Plaintiff’s Consent Form is attached hereto.   6  present.   25.  Plaintiff and other similarly-situated home health aides performed work between  client appointments, including but not limited to driving to and from client homes and taking  clients to appointments.   26.  The amount of overtime hours Plaintiff and other similarly situated home health  aides worked are reflected on their time sheets and pay stubs.   26.  However, Defendant did not pay Plaintiff and other similarly-situated home  health aides for all of the hours they worked between client appointments.  5   27.  All of these activities occurred between the commencement of their first principal  activity and the completion of their last principal activity during the workday, and thus, are  compensable under the continuous workday rule.   27.  Plaintiff estimates, that on average he worked between ten (10) and twenty (20)  overtime hours per week.    28.  As a result of Defendant’s practice and policy of not paying Plaintiff and other  similarly-situated home health aides for all of the work they performed between client  appointments, Plaintiff and other similarly-situated home health aides were denied significant  amounts of overtime compensation.  (Failure to Keep Accurate Records)   28.  Plaintiff is unable to state at this time the exact size of the potential class, by upon  information and belief, avers that is consists of at least 100 persons.   29.  Defendant failed to make, keep and preserve accurate records of the unpaid work  performed by Plaintiff and other similarly-situated home health aides, including time worked  between client appointments.  (Defendant Willfully Violated the FLSA)   29.  This action is maintainable as an “opt-in” collective action pursuant to 29 U.S.C.   216(b) as to claims for unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees and  costs under the FLSA.  In addition to Plaintiff, numerous current and former employees are  similarly situated with regard to their wages and claims for unpaid wages and damages.  Plaintiff  is representative of those other employees and is acting on behalf of their interests as well as his  own in bringing this action.   30.  These similarly-situated employees are known to Defendant and are readily  identifiable through Defendant’s payroll records.  These individuals may readily be notified of  this action, and allowed to opt in pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 216(b), for the purpose of collectively  adjudicating their claims for unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees  and costs under the FLSA.  30.  Defendant knowingly and willfully engaged in the above-mentioned violations of  the FLSA.   31.  Plaintiff brings Count Two of this action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and  (b)(3) on behalf of himself and all other members of the class (“the Ohio Class”) defined as:  All current and former home health aides employed by Noor Home  Health Care LLC at any time between January 1, 2015 and the  present.  7   32.  The Ohio Class is so numerous that joinder of all class members is impracticable.   Plaintiff is unable to state at this time the exact size of the potential Ohio Class, but upon  information and belief, avers that it consists of at least 100 persons.    33.  There are questions of law or fact common to the Ohio Class, including but not  limited to the following:  (a)  whether Defendant failed to pay overtime compensation to  its home health aides for hours worked in excess of 40 each  workweek; and  (b)  what amount of monetary relief will compensate Plaintiff  Richard Wells and other members of the class for Defendant’s  violation of R.C. 4111.03 and 4111.10.   34.  The claims of the named Plaintiff Richard Wells are typical of the claims of other  members of the Ohio Class.  Named Plaintiff’s claims arise out of the same uniform course of  conduct by Defendant, and are based on the same legal theories, as the claims of the other Ohio  Class members.    35.  Named Plaintiff Richard Wells will fairly and adequately protect the interests of  the Ohio Class.  His interests are not antagonistic to, but rather are in unison with, the interests of  the other Ohio Class members.  The named Plaintiff’s counsel has broad experience in handling  class action wage-and-hour litigation, and is fully qualified to prosecute the claims of the Ohio  Class in this case.    36.  The questions of law or fact that are common to the Ohio Class predominate over  any questions affecting only individual members.  The primary questions that will determine  Defendant’s liability to the Ohio Class, listed above, are common to the class as a whole, and  predominate over any questions affecting only individual class members.  8   37.  A class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient  adjudication of this controversy.  Requiring Ohio Class members to pursue their claims  individually would entail a host of separate suits, with concomitant duplication of costs,  attorneys’ fees, and demands on court resources.  Many Ohio Class members’ claims are  sufficiently small that they would be reluctant to incur the substantial cost, expense, and risk of  pursuing their claims individually.  Certification of this case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 will  enable the issues to be adjudicated for all class members with the efficiencies of class litigation.     38.  Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations as if fully rewritten  herein.    39.  Defendant’s practice and policy of not paying Plaintiff and other similarly- situated home health aides overtime compensation at the rate of one and one-half times their  regular rate of pay for the hours they worked over 40 each workweek violated the FLSA, 29  43.  Plaintiff in corporates by reference the foregoing allegations as if fully rewritten  herein.   44.  Defendant’s practice and policy of not paying Plaintiff and other similarly- situated home health aides overtime compensation at the rate of one and one-half times their  regular rate of pay for the hours they worked over 40 each workweek violated the OMFWSA, 