United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT July 15, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-51244
Summary Calendar
ROBERT L POWELL; ET AL
Plaintiffs
ROBERT L POWELL; ROBERT C CHILDS;
WILLIS E PICKETT; TRACY ROWELL; RONALD FOLEY
Plaintiffs - Appellants
v
NORTHWESTERN RESOURCES CO
Defendant - Appellee
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-02-CV-13
- - - - - - - - - -
Before KING, Chief Judge, and DAVIS and BARKSDALE, Circuit
Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Robert L. Powell, Robert C. Childs, Willis E. Pickett,
Tracy Rowell, and Ronald Foley (collectively, the Plaintiffs)
appeal from the district court’s grant of partial summary
judgment for Northwestern Resources Co. (NRC) relating to the
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 03-51244
-2-
Plaintiffs’ Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) claim for overtime
compensation for certain pre-shift and post-shift activities.**
The Plaintiffs’ unopposed motion to correct a minor error in
their reply brief is GRANTED.
The Plaintiffs assert that, among other things, the tasks of
signing in at NRC’s “ready room,” receiving daily work
assignments, conducting pre- and post-shift inspections of the
company’s transport vehicles, and travel time to and from their
respective job sites, constituted integral components of their
principal work activities from which NRC benefitted and for which
the Plaintiffs were entitled to be paid.
We have reviewed the record and hold that the pre- and post-
shift activities cited by the Plaintiffs were neither performed
in the ordinary course of business nor for the benefit of NRC.
See Vega v. Gaspar, 36 F.3d 417, 424-25 (5th Cir. 1994).
Similarly, as determined by the district court, the Plaintiffs
offer insufficient summary judgment proof of a contract or the
existence of a custom or practice at NRC that compensated for
travel time to a designated excavation site. See 29 U.S.C.
§ 254(b). Accordingly, because the Plaintiffs fail to identify
specific evidence demonstrating the existence of a genuine issue
for trial, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. See
**
On stipulation of the parties, the Plaintiffs’ remaining
claim regarding nonpayment of a night-shift premium was withdrawn
and dismissed.
No. 03-51244
-3-
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 (1986); Anderson
v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242, 250 (1986).
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.