WALKER et al v. INNOVATIVE CONCEPT SOLUTIONS INTERNATIONAL, INC. et al

Filing 22

MEMORANDUM AND OPINION. Signed by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly on 11/27/2013.(lcckk3)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CHANEEL WALKER and
GAIL ALSTON,
Plaintiffs,
Civil Action No. 12-2046 (CKK)

v.
INNOVATIVE CONCEPT SOLUTIONS
INTERNATIONAL, INC. et al.,
Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION
(November 27, 2013)
Chaneel Walker and Gail Alston (“Plaintiffs”) filed the Complaint in the above-captioned
action on December 20, 2012, against Defendants Innovative Concept Solutions International,
Inc. (“ICSI”) and Lorraine Thomas (“Thomas”). See Compl., ECF No. [1]. By Order dated May
29, 2013, the Court dismissed without prejudice Plaintiffs’ claims against Thomas, leaving only
Plaintiffs’ claims against ICSI. See Order (May 29, 2013), ECF No. [13]. On June 18, 2013,
Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Default Judgment on the basis that ICSI had not answered Plaintiffs’
Complaint nor appeared in court. In an Order entered July 3, 2013, the Court denied without
prejudice Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default Judgment on the basis that Plaintiffs failed to specify
each element of damages, or the monetary amount thereof, that Plaintiffs claimed to be entitled
to recover from ICSI, and failed to include evidentiary support for its damages claims. See Order
(July 3, 2013), ECF No. [18]. Presently before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for
Default Judgment. See ECF No. [19]. For the reasons stated below, the Court again DENIES
WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for Default Judgment.

I.

BACKGROUND

On June 18, 2013, Plaintiffs filed an initial Motion for Default Judgment. See ECF No.
[17]. Plaintiffs’ Motion did not specify each element of damages, or the monetary amount
thereof, that Plaintiffs claimed to be entitled to recover from ICSI, nor did it include evidentiary
support for its damages claims. The Court noted that although Plaintiffs’ Complaint attached as
exhibits what appeared to be documents supporting some of their claims, Plaintiffs’ Motion
made no effort to tie those documents to any legal arguments to support their claims. As the
Court had insufficient information on which to make an independent determination of the sum to
be awarded, the Court denied without prejudice Plaintiffs’ Motion. See Order (July 3, 2013),
ECF No. [18]. In its Order denying Plaintiffs’ Motion, the Court also expressed concern over
whether ICSI presently exists as a corporate entity against whom Plaintiffs may obtain relief.
The Court noted that Plaintiffs’ Complaint stated that ICSI’s status as a stock corporation had
been forfeited by the Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation. The Court requested
Plaintiffs provide additional information about the corporate status of ICSI and confirm that ICSI
was not presently in bankruptcy proceedings. Finally, the Court requested Plaintiffs provide
documentary proof that Victor Mbakpuo, whom Plaintiffs represent is the registered agent for
ICSI, is, in fact ICSI’s registered agent.
On July 31, 2013, Plaintiffs filed the present [19] Amended Motion for Default
Judgment.
II.

LEGAL STANDARD

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) provides that the Clerk of the Court must enter a
party’s request for a default “[w]hen a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is
sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend, and that failure is shown by affidavit or
2

otherwise.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). After a default has been entered by the Clerk, a party may
move the court for a default judgment. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2). “The determination of whether
default judgment is appropriate is committed to the discretion of the trial court.” Int’l Painters &
Allied Trades Indus. Pension Fund v. Auxier Drywall, LLC, 531 F. Supp. 2d 56, 57 (D.D.C.
2008) (citing Jackson v. Beech, 636 F.2d 831, 836 (D.C. Cir. 1980)).
Upon entry of default by the clerk of the court, the “defaulting defendant is deemed to
admit every well-pleaded allegation in the complaint.” Int’l Painters & Allied Trades Indus.
Pension Fund v. R.W. Amrine Drywall Co. Inc., 239 F. Supp. 2d 26, 30 (D.D.C. 2002) (internal
citation omitted). “Although the default establishes a defendant’s liability, the court is required
to make an independent determination of the sum to be awarded unless the amount of damages is
certain.” Id. (citing Adkins v. Teseo, 180 F. Supp. 2d 15, 17 (D.D.C. 2001)). Accordingly, when
moving for a default judgment, the plaintiff must prove its entitlement to the amount of monetary
damages requested. Id. “In ruling on such a motion, the court may rely on detailed affidavits or
documentary evidence to determine the appropriate sum for the default judgment.” Id. (citing
United Artists Corp. v. Freeman, 605 F.2d 854, 857 (5th Cir. 1979)).
III.

DISCUSSION

The Court denies without prejudice Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for Default Judgment for
two reasons. First, Plaintiffs entirely fail to provide the Court any of the additional information
the Court specifically requested in its July 3, 2013, Order. See ECF No. [18]. Plaintiffs do not
even address, much less provide any information explaining the impact of, ICSI’s current
corporate status and whether ICSI is in bankruptcy proceedings. This information is critical to
the Court’s ability to resolve this matter as it may directly impact Plaintiffs’ ability to obtain
relief. If ICSI is currently in bankruptcy proceedings, the present suit would be automatically
3

stayed pending the resolution of those proceedings. Moreover, the Court presently does not have
sufficient facts from which to determine whether a judgment can be entered against ICSI for its
failure to pay wages after forfeiting its corporate status.

Accordingly, the Court requests

Plaintiffs provide a legal briefing on whether ICSI’s forfeited corporate status affects the ability
of the Court to enter a judgment against ICSI.
Plaintiffs also failed to provide any documentary proof that Victor Mbakpuo is in fact the
registered agent for ICSI as well as documentation of Mr. Mbakpuo’s current address. The
Court understands from the Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation Business Entity
Database

that

Mr.

Mbakpuo

is

indeed

the

registered

agent

http://sdatcert3.resiusa.org/ucc-charter/searchByName_a.aspx?mode=name.

for

ICSI.

See

However,

the

address for Mr. Mbakpuo listed in the Maryland database and the address listed in Plaintiffs’
Complaint, Summons, and Certificate of Service are not the same.1 The Court is concerned that
Mr. Mbakpuo has not been properly served nor received Plaintiffs’ subsequent pleadings.
Knowing whether Plaintiffs’ Complaint was properly served on ICSI’s registered agent is crucial
to the Court’s ability to fairly adjudicate this default judgment claim. Thus, the Court renews its
request that Plaintiffs provide documentation of Mr. Mbakpuo’s current address and further
explain why Mr. Mbakpuo was served the Complaint at an address different from that listed in
the Maryland database.
Second, Plaintiffs’ again fail to provide sufficient evidence to prove their entitlement to
the amount of monetary damages requested.

Plaintiffs seek (1) unpaid wages; (2) unpaid

vacation hours; (3) liquidated damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and the

1

The Maryland database lists the following address as Victor Mbakpuo’s current address: 818
Roeder Rd., Ste 604, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Plaintiffs, however, served Mr. Mbakpuo and sent all
subsequent pleadings to the following address: 11630 Silvergate Lane, Bowie, MD 20720.

4

District of Columbia Wage Payment and Collection Law (“DCWPCL”); and (4) attorneys’ fees
and court costs. In Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion, Plaintiffs state that they have not been paid for
a set number of hours worked in 2012. Apparently as evidence to support this assertion,
Plaintiffs provide time sheets for the weeks in which they allege in their pleadings they were not
paid. However, the time sheets standing alone are not evidence that Plaintiffs were not paid for
the time worked. Plaintiffs have submitted no evidence showing that Plaintiffs were not paid for
the hours they recorded or, at the very least, a sworn affidavit attesting under oath that they were
not paid for these specific hours. Plaintiffs only allege they were not paid for these hours in their
Amended Motion; however, statements in pleadings are not sufficient evidence to prove
Plaintiffs entitlement to damages. See R.W. Amrine Drywall Co, Inc., 239 F.Supp.2d at 30
(explaining that although the well-pleaded allegations in the complaint are deemed to be
admitted for the purposes of determining liability, the court must make an independent
determination of the sum to be awarded and “may rely on detailed affidavits or documentary
evidence to determine the appropriate sum for the default judgment“). To the extent that
documentary evidence does not exist or is unavailable, Plaintiffs do not indicate as much in their
Amended Motion or supporting exhibits.

Moreover, Plaintiffs failed to provide Plaintiff

Walker’s time sheets for the weeks ending in April 20, 2012, and April 27, 2012, for which they
allege Plaintiff Walker was never paid. Thus, Plaintiffs have presented no evidence that Plaintiff
Walker worked during these time periods. In addition, Plaintiffs’ Complaint and Amended
Motion state that Plaintiff Alston was employed with ICSI “until March 2012” yet Plaintiffs
provide time sheets from Plaintiff Alston which correspond to four weeks in April 2012. These
four weeks in April are also included in Plaintiff Alston’s request for unpaid wages. The Court
is confused by this inconsistency and requests clarification from Plaintiffs. In sum, there is no
5

evidence upon which the Court may award damages for Plaintiffs’ unpaid wages.
In addition, Plaintiffs allege that ICSI failed to pay Plaintiff Walker for 240 hours of
vacation to which she was entitled, but never allowed to take. However, Plaintiffs entirely fail to
provide any evidence supporting this claim for damages. Plaintiffs have not submitted any
document, such as an employee contract or handbook or statement of company policy,
establishing the amount of vacation to which Plaintiff Walker was entitled, nor any document or
sworn affidavit attesting to the amount of vacation Plaintiff Walker was not allowed to use and is
thus due to be paid. Again, Plaintiffs cannot rely simply on their allegations in pleadings to
prove their entitlement to these damages. See Id. To the extent that such documentary evidence
does not exist or is unavailable, Plaintiffs have not so indicated. Consequently, there is no
evidence upon which the Court may award damages for Plaintiff Walker’s unpaid vacation
hours. Moreover, without sufficient evidence to calculate the amount of unpaid wages and
vacation hours due Plaintiffs, the Court cannot calculate the liquidated damages to which
Plaintiffs may be entitled under the FLSA or the DCWPCL.
Finally, Plaintiffs provide no evidence of the attorneys’ fees and court costs for which
they request damages in their Amended Motion. Although they list in their Amended Motion the
amount of attorney hours and the billable rates involved in this case, Plaintiffs have filed no
documentary evidence or affidavit sworn under oath itemizing the attorneys’ fees and court
costs. Consequently, Plaintiffs have failed to prove their entitlement to attorneys’ fees or court
costs.
III. CONCLUSION
As Plaintiffs have once again failed to provide sufficient evidence of the damages to
which they claim they are entitled and failed to provide the crucial information requested by the
6

Court regarding ICSI’s corporate status, bankruptcy proceedings, and registered agent, the Court
DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiffs’ [19] Amended Motion for Default Judgment. By
no later than January 6, 2014, Plaintiffs shall file a revised motion for default judgment
providing the evidentiary support discussed above and thoroughly addressing the impact of
ICSI’s corporate status, whether ICSI is in bankruptcy proceedings, and the correct current
address for ICSI’s registered agent. If Plaintiffs do not file a revised motion for default judgment
by that date, this decision will stand and the case will be dismissed. This is the last opportunity
the Court will afford Plaintiffs to provide proof of their requested damages.
An appropriate Order accompanies this memorandum opinion.

/s/
COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

7