Integrated Tech Group, LLC
12 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2014–2026)
4 trusted published court opinions across 2 distinct cases · 1 docket-only case without a recorded end date
What public court records show
Public federal court records list Integrated Tech Group, LLC as an employer in 12 distinct federal employment cases between 2014 and 2026.
The most common claims on record were Wage Theft and Wrongful Termination.
Cases were filed across 2 states, most often in CA.
These figures summarize publicly available U.S. federal court records only. Most workplace disputes are resolved privately and never appear in litigation. A case outcome reflects many factors and is not a finding that any employer violated the law.
Written decisions across 2 distinct cases.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
Integrated Tech Group, LLC appears in 4 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Monplaisir v. Integrated Tech Group, LLC (2022) — Settlement. This case involved an employment dispute between a worker named Monplaisir and their employer, Integrated Tech Group, LLC, a technology company. The specific details of what sparked the disagreement between the employee and company are not fully detailed in the available information, but it involved employment law clai… Read the ruling.
Monplaisir v. Integrated Tech Group, LLC (2021) — Defendant Win. A worker named Monplaisir filed a lawsuit against Integrated Tech Group, LLC, claiming the company violated employment laws. The specific details of what allegedly happened between Monplaisir and the tech company are not provided in the available case information, but the dispute involved workplace-related legal issues… Read the ruling.
Mendez v. Integrated Tech Group, LLC (2020) — Plaintiff Win. An employee named Mendez sued Integrated Tech Group, claiming the company failed to pay him overtime wages he was entitled to receive. The case went to trial in federal court in Florida in 2020. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Wage Theft, Wrongful Termination. Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Wage Theft and Wrongful Termination.
Published opinions span California (3), Florida (1). California is an EEOC deferral state, which extends the federal Title VII / ADA / ADEA filing deadline from 180 to 300 days. Browse state-specific employment rulings for jurisdictional patterns. California rulings and Florida rulings.
These published opinions sit within the technology sector, where age-discrimination, non-compete, and whistleblower-retaliation claims appear frequently.
Claim Types
What these numbers mean
A case is one lawsuit, identified by its court and docket number. The docket is the running court record for that same case — it is not an extra case.
A published opinion or ruling is a written court decision. One case can produce several opinions, so opinion counts and case counts answer different questions. Only trusted, reportable opinions are used in the outcome statistics on this page.
Docket entries are the individual filings inside a case — motions, orders, scheduling notices. We read them to confirm a case is real and to see where it got to, but an entry is never counted as a case or as an outcome. A single case can generate hundreds of entries.
Far fewer opinions than cases is normal. Many employment cases settle privately or close without a published opinion. No opinion here does not mean the worker lost; it means this public record does not show a reportable result.
Everything on this page comes from public federal court records. Where we are not confident a record is accurate, we leave it out rather than guess.
Federal court cases
public court recordsOne row per court+docket case · written opinions stay grouped inside their case · plaintiff names redacted
Other Technology employers
Browse trusted published opinions involving similar workplaces.
Data sourced from public federal court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes extracted using AI analysis. This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The presence of an employer on this page does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.