Calle v. ABC Corp. et al

Filing 45

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS, The court has reviewed both the record and the R&R and, finding no clear error, ADOPTS IN FULL the R&R (Dkt. 43 ). Plaintiff's Motion (Dkt. 28 ) is GRANTED. The court awards Plaintiff damages, agains t both named defendants, jointly and severally, in the amount of $56,414.41--representing $48,731.01 in compensatory, liquidated, and statutory damages, and $7,155.00 in attorney's fees and $528.40 in costs--plus pre-judgment interest at the rate of $3.21 per day from January 31, 2015 through the entry of judgment, on $13,016.71 of plaintiff's recommended wage-claim damages, and interest at the daily rate of $3.70 from July 15, 2015 through the entry of judgment, on recommended breach-of-contract damages of $15,000. The Clerk of Court is respectfully DIRECTED to enter judgment and close this case. So Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 1/11/2018. (fwd'd for jgm) (Lee, Tiffeny)

0 1p
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
-X

CARLOS CALLE,individually and on behalfof

all other employees similarly situated,

ORDER

Plaintiff,

16-CV-1008(NGG)
(RLM)

-againstYONELES ENTERPRISES,INC. d/b/a La
Marina Bar Restaurant, AIDA M.RODRIGUEZ,
JOHN DOE and JANE DOE #1-10,
Defendants.
-X

NICHOLAS G. GARAUFIS,United States District Judge.

On February 29,2016,Plaintiff Carlos Calle commenced this action against his former

employers. Defendants Yoneles Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a La Marina Bar Restaurant, Aida M.

Rodriguez, and John and Jane Does 1 through 10 (collectively,"Defendants")pursuant to the
Fair Labor Standards Act("FLSA")and New York Labor Law("NYLL"). (Am. Compl.(Dkt.

18).) Defendants have not appeared in this action and have failed to answer or otherwise

respond to the Amended Complaint. On April 17,2017,the Clerk of Court entered default
against Defendants. (Entry of Default(Dkt. 26).) On May 23,2017,Plaintiff moved pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 for entry ofa defaultjudgment against Defendants(the

"Motion"). (Mot.for Default J.("Mot.")(Dkt. 28).) The court referred the Motion to Chief
Magistrate Judge Roanne L. Mann for a Report and Recommendation("R&R")pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(1). (May 24,2017, Order.)
On October 24,2017, Judge Marm issued an R&R recommending that "defaultjudgment

be granted against both named defendants,jointly and severally, in the amount of$56,414.41,

representing $48,731.01 in compensatory, liquidated, and statutory damages, and $7,155.00 in

attorney's fees and $528.40 in costs." (R&R(Dkt.43)at 1-2.) In addition, Judge Mann
recommended "awarding prejudgment interest, at the rate of$3.21 per day from January 31,

2015 through the entry ofjudgment,on $13,016.71 of plaintiffs recommended wage-claim

damages, and interest at the daily rate of$3.70 from July 15,2015 through the entry of
judgment,on recommended breach-of-contract damages of$15,000." (Id at 2.) Judge Mann
also recommended that "plaintiff be directed to show good cause for failing to serve the John and
Jane Doe defendants within 90 days ofthe filing of his initial pleading, or else seek voluntary

dismissal ofthe claims against those defendants." QdJ The court notes that, after the issuance
ofthe R&R,Plaintiff sought voluntary dismissal ofthe claims against the John and Jane Doe
defendants, and the John and Jane Doe defendants were terminated as parties. (Notice of
Voluntary Dismissal(Dkt. 44).)

No party has objected to the R&R and the time to do so has passed. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
72(b)(2). Therefore,the court reviews the R&R for clear error.

Porter v. Potter.

219 F. App'x 112,113(2d Cir. 2007)(summary order)("[FJailure to object timely to a
magistrate's report operates as a waiver of any further judicial review ofthe magistrate's
decision." (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)); Gesualdi v. Mack Excavation &
Trailer Serv.. Inc.. No. 09-CV-2502(KAM)
(JO),2010 WL 985294, at *I (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 15,

2010)("Where no objection to the[R&R]has been filed, the district court need only satisfy itself
that there is no clear error on the face ofthe record." (internal quotation marks and citation
omitted)). The court has reviewed both the record and the R&R and,finding no clear error,
ADOPTS IN FULL the R&R(Dkt. 43). Plaintiffs Motion(Dkt. 28)is GRANTED. The court

awards Plaintiff damages, against both named defendants,jointly and severally, in the amount of

$56,414.41—^representing $48,731.01 in compensatory, liquidated, and statutory damages, and
$7,155.00 in attomey's fees and $528.40 in costs—^plus pre-judgment interest

at the rate of$3.21 per day from January 31,2015 through the entry ofjudgment, on $13,016.71
of plaintiffs recommended wage-claim damages, and interest at the daily rate of$3.70 from Jiily
15,2015 through the entry ofjudgment, on recommended breach-of-contract damages of
$15,000. The Clerk of Court is respectfully DIRECTED to enterjudgment and close this case.
SO ORDERED.

s/Nicholas G. Garaufis
Dated: Brooklyn,New York

January H ,2018

NICHOLAS G. GARAI

United States District Judge