Ruzsa v. Stanley Steemer, Co. et al
Filing
19
ORDER denying as moot 15 Motion to Quash and/or Dismiss; Adopting Report and Recommendations - re 17 Report and Recommendations. Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk is directed to strike and delete Docket Entries 1-1, 1-2, 1-3, and 11 from the record. Thereafter, the Clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Carlos E. Mendoza on 8/5/2015. (DJD)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
ISTVAN RUZSA,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No: 6:15-cv-695-Orl-41DAB
STANLEY STEEMER, CO., MICHAEL
J. MACDONALD, P.A. and
BRIDGEFIELD EMPLOYERS
INSURANCE, CO.,
Defendants.
/
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge David A. Baker’s
Report and Recommendation (Doc. 17), which recommends that this case be dismissed for lack of
subject-matter jurisdiction.
After an independent de novo review of the record and noting that no objections were
timely filed, the Court agrees entirely with the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Report
and Recommendation. Additionally, to the extent Plaintiff attempts to allege a violation of the
minimum wage and overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C.
§§ 206, 207, Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the statute of limitations. 1 Plaintiff has attached
various documents to his Complaint (Doc. 1) that appear to detail his payment history while
1
Although a district court cannot typically raise an affirmative defense sua sponte, it is
proper to do so when the defense is apparent from the face of the complaint and raising the defense
would promote judicial economy. See Latimer v. Roaring Toyz, Inc., 601 F.3d 1224, 1239–40
(11th Cir. 2010) (citing with approval Yellen v. Cooper, 828 F.2d 1471 (10th Cir. 1987) for the
proposition that affirmative defenses that are apparent from the face of the complaint can be raised
by the court sua sponte).
Page 1 of 3
employed by Defendant Stanley Steemer, Co. (“Stanley Steemer”). (See generally Doc. 1-3). All
of these documents, however, are dated between 2009 and 2010. Plaintiff also alleges that his
employment with Stanley Steemer terminated on December 30, 2010. (Id. at 1). “[T]he ordinary
statute of limitations in cases brought under the FLSA is two years, [but] a cause of action arising
out of a willful violation of the FLSA may be commenced within three years after the cause of
action accrued.” Allen v. Bd. of Pub. Educ. for Bibb Cty., 495 F.3d 1306, 1323 (11th Cir. 2007)
(citing 29 U.S.C. § 255(a)). Even assuming that Plaintiff is alleging a willful violation of the FLSA,
the statute of limitations on Plaintiff’s claims lapsed on December 30, 2013, over a year prior to
the filing of this lawsuit. Accordingly, Plaintiff has failed to state any federal cause of action and
has not alleged diversity of citizenship. Therefore, this Court declines to exercise jurisdiction over
Plaintiff’s Complaint.
Furthermore, in his filings with the Court, Plaintiff submitted several documents containing
his full social security number and date of birth. (See Doc. Nos. 1-1, 1-2, 1-3, 11). In a filing with
the Court that contains either a social security number or a date of birth, the filing party may
include only “the last four digits of the social-security number” and “the year of the individual’s
birth.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(a)(1)–(2). Plaintiff’s filings were not properly redacted, and accordingly
will be stricken. See Brown v. McConnell, No. CV409-086, 2009 WL 2338001, at *2 n.3 (S.D.
Ga. July 27, 2009).
Therefore, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 17) is ADOPTED and CONFIRMED as
modified herein.
2. Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice.
Page 2 of 3
3. Defendant Michael J. MacDonald, P.A.’s Motion to Quash and/or Dismiss (Doc.
15) is DENIED as moot.
4. The Clerk is directed to strike and delete Docket Entries 1-1, 1-2, 1-3, and 11 from
the record.
5. Thereafter, the Clerk is directed to close this case.
DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on August 5, 2015.
Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record
Unrepresented Party
Page 3 of 3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?