Touqan v. Cell Fix, Inc.

Filing 45

ORDER denying 37 Motion to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Amanda Arnold Sansone on 11/15/2023. (BEE)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
OMAR TOUQAN,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 8:22-cv-2505-KKM-AAS

CELL FIX, INC.,
Defendant.
________________________________/
ORDER
Plaintiff Omar Touqan (Touqan) moves to compel Defendant Cell Fix,
Inc.’s (Cell Fix) banking records in response to Touqan’s Second Request for
Production of Document No. 16. (Doc. 37). Cell Fix opposes the motion. (Doc.
40).
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) provides that “[p]arties may
obtain discovery regarding any non-privileged matter that is relevant to any
party’s claim or defense and proportional to the needs of the case.” Fed. R. Civ.
P. 26(b)(1). “The overall purpose of discovery under the Federal Rules is to
require the disclosure of all relevant information, so that the ultimate
resolution of disputed issues in any civil action may be based on a full and
accurate understanding of the true facts, and therefore embody a fair and just

1

result.” Jacobi v. Experian Info. Sols., No. 20-cv-60591, 2020 WL 13389310, at
*2 (S.D. Fla. Dec. 23, 2020).
Touqan sued Cell Fix asserting a single cause of action—Cell Fix violated
the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). (Doc. 1). Touqan alleges he was an
employee of Cell Fix, who failed to pay him overtime wages. (Id., ¶¶ 2, 3, 5, 6,
9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 21, 25, and 34). On July 19, 2023, Touqan served its Second
Request for Production of Documents. (Doc. 37-1). Request for Production No.
16 requests: “Any documents, text messages, emails, ledgers, or cancelled
checks showing payment(s) made by [Cell Fix] to [Touqan] as compensation for
hours worked by [Touqan].”1 (Doc. 37-1, p. 2).
On September 8, 2023, Cell Fix responded:
Objection: This request seeks documents that were either
intentionally destroyed by Plaintiff or lost as a result of Plaintiff’s
unauthorized infiltration of Cell Fix’s computers, systems, and
networks. Further, Cell Fix objects to the extent that documents
do not exist because Plaintiff insisted on being paid in cash because
he did not have a banking account at the time allegedly as a result
of immigration and legal issues. Notwithstanding the foregoing
objections, all responsive documents have already been produced.
(Doc. 37-2, p. 2). Although Touqan requests “documents . . . showing
payment(s) made by [Cell Fix] to [Touqan]” Cell Fix states no such “records”

“Documents” is defined as: “writings or recording of every kind or character
including, without limitation, all correspondence, contracts, agreements, letters,
invoices, reports, records, memoranda, computer printouts, pamphlets, photographs,
notes of meetings, including materials taped, filmed, or photographed and all other
matters commonly considered to be documents.” (Doc. 37-1, p. 1).
1

2

exist because Touqan was paid in cash.2 (Doc. 40, p. 4). Discovery closed on
November 3, 3023, the same day Touqan filed this motion to compel. (See Doc.
22). If Touqan wanted to request records of cash withdrawals specifically, he
should have done so before the discovery deadline.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Touqan’s motion to compel (Doc. 32)
is DENIED.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida on November 15, 2023.

The court notes Cell Fix’s recent argument that it did not employ Touqan. Instead,
Touqan was employed by Phone Rescue, Inc. (See Doc. 40-1, ¶ 8). According to Cell
Fix, there are no responsive banking records to Touqan’s Second Request for
Production of Documents No. 16 because Cell Fix did not employ or pay Touqan. (See
Doc. 40, p. 4).
2

3