evidence, credibility determinations are within the province of the factfinder. See Anderson, 477 U.S. at 255, 106 S.Ct. 2505 (“Credibility determinations, the weighing of the evidence, and the drawing of legitimate inferences from the facts are jury functions, not those of a judge, whether he [or she] is ruling on a motion for summary judgment or for a directed verdict.”). For this reason, summary judgment on the issue of liability is inappropriate. Dynasty also argues that “Plaintiffs’ attempt to impute global liability based upon evidence pertaining to one individual falls short of meeting their summary judgment burden.” Def.’s Resp. 6. However, such a “global imputation” goes to the issue of damages and not to liability. See Moreau v. Klevenhagen, 956 F.2d 516, 523 (5th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>); see also Maynor v. Dow Chem. Co., 671
holding that the question of whether any employees were actually deprived of overtime compensation because of employers no overtime policy in violation of the flsa should have been addressed only at the damages stage of the proceedings holding that the flsa does not prohibit changes in wage rates it prohibits the payment of overtime at less than one and onehalf times the regular wage rate holding that flsa which provides an exemption from the acts wage and overtime provisions for fishermen preempts claims under alaskas minimumwage and overtime statute holding that aims of wage and overtime provisions of flsa were not sufficiently connected to fourteenth amendment concerns so as to fall under congress  5 powers holding party may raise jurisdictional issue at any stage of proceedings