Vela v. M&G USA Corporation et al

Filing 49

ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT granting in part and denying in part 46 Motion for Summary Judgment.(Signed by Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos) Parties notified.(mserpa, 2)

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas

ENTERED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION
JONATHAN VELA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
INTEGRITY MECHANICAL
SPECIALISTS LLC d/b/a IMS –
INTEGRITY MECHANICAL
SPECIALISTS LLC; RICHARD
BRYANT; ORBITAL INSULATION
CORP.; and EDUARDO GRACIAN,
Defendants.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

July 23, 2018
David J. Bradley, Clerk

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:17-CV-00013

ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
On April 16, 2018, Plaintiff filed his Motion for Summary Judgment (D.E. 46)
against Defendants Integrity Mechanical Specialists LLC d/b/a IMS-Integrity Mechanical
Specialists LLC (IMS), Richard Bryant (Bryant), Orbital Insulation Corp. (Orbital), and
Eduardo Gracian (Gracian). For the reasons set out below, the motion is GRANTED IN
PART and DENIED IN PART.
PROCEDURAL POSTURE
On May 21, 2018, the Court issued its Order Regarding Stay and Pending Motion
(D.E. 47), noting that Defendants IMS and Bryant are listed as appearing pro se, and that
they had not been served with the motion for summary judgment. (D.E. 46). The Court
therefore ordered Plaintiff to re-serve the motion against those Defendants and to file an
amended certificate of service reflecting that service. The Court then extended the
response date to accommodate the un-served Defendants. D.E. 47.
1/3

To date, Plaintiff has not filed an amended certificate of service and it appears that
Defendants IMS and Bryant have not been served with the motion. Sufficient time for reservice of the motion has elapsed and the Court therefore takes it under submission and
issues this Order.
The motion is DENIED as to Defendants IMS and Bryant as they have not been
served with the motion. This denial is without prejudice to proceed on any appropriate
request for entry of default and motion for default judgment.
With respect to Defendants Orbital and Gracian, the motion was properly served,
but no response was filed by the initial submission date of May 7, 2018. Defendants
Orbital and Gracian did not respond to the Court’s inquiries regarding any reason for
failure to timely respond and no response has been forthcoming during the extended
response period. According to this Court’s Local Rule 7.4, a failure to respond is a
representation of no opposition to the relief sought.
FACTS
The Court finds that Defendants Orbital and Gracian have admitted to certain facts
in their answer:
 Plaintiff Vela was an employee of Orbital and worked at the M&G Chemicals
facility. D.E. 10, ¶ 1.3.
 Plaintiff Vela is an FLSA non-exempt employee of Defendant Orbital. Id., ¶¶
1.8, 4.6.
 Plaintiff has been employed by Defendants within the meaning of the FLSA
within this judicial district within the relevant three-year period. Id., ¶ 2.1.
 Defendant Gracian is the President of Defendant Orbital and an employer as
defined by 29 U.S.C. § 203(d). Id., ¶¶ 2.9, 5.9.
2/3

 Defendants have been enterprises engaged in commerce or in the production of
goods for commerce within the meaning of Section 3(s)(1) of the FLSA, 29
U.S.C. § 203(s)(1). Id., ¶ 4.3; see also D.E. 1, ¶ 4.3.
According to Plaintiff Vela’s uncontroverted summary judgment evidence, Orbital and
Gracian failed to compensate him for at least one pay-period in the amount of $920.00,
therefore failing to pay minimum wage as required by the FLSA. D.E. 46-6.
DISCUSSION
Upon the evidence provided, Defendants Orbital and Gracian are liable to Plaintiff
Vela in the amount of $920.00 for unpaid back wages. Defendants Orbital and Gracian
are further liable to Plaintiff Vela in the amount of $920.00 as additional liquidated
damages. 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). Plaintiff is entitled to judgment in the total amount of
$1,840.00 against Defendants Orbital and Gracian, jointly and severally, for
compensatory damages and may apply for attorney’s fees and costs by separate motion.
In the alternative, should he elect to recover under his quantum meruit theory, the
same facts entitle Plaintiff Vela to the amount of $920.00 in compensatory damages,
jointly and severally, against Defendants Orbital and Gracian.
The motion for summary judgment (D.E. 46) is thus GRANTED IN PART as
against Defendants Orbital and Gracian and DENIED IN PART as to Defendants IMS
and Bryant.
ORDERED this 23rd day of July, 2018.
___________________________________
NELVA GONZALES RAMOS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3/3