In Landers v. Quality Communications, Inc., 771 F.3d 638 (9th Cir. 2014) (No. 12-15890), a former employee brought an action against his former employer, alleging a failure to pay minimum and overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The district court dismissed the complaint, ruling that it failed to plead sufficient facts to meet the plausibility requirement ofTwombly and Iqbal, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed. The court noted that this case presented an issue of first impression in the circuit, the district courts that have considered the question are split, and there is no consensus among the other circuit courts as to what facts must be affirmatively pled to state a viable FLSA claim post-Twombly and Iqbal. Joining the First, Second and Third Circuits, the court held that in order to survive a motion to dismiss, a plaintiff asserting a claim to overtime payments must allege that he or she worked more than forty hours in a given workweek without being compensated for the overtime hours worked during that specific workweek. A plaintiff need not, however, allege the number of hours worked without compensation. Applying this standard to the present case, the court found that plaintiff’s complaint was deficient because it included only generalized allegations of violations of the minimum wage and overtime provisions of FLSA, and failed to assert a specific workweek during which plaintiff worked in excess of forty hours and was not paid overtime.