Opinion
14-CV-7290 (MKB) (MDG)
03-29-2016
RAFAEL MORALES, FERNANDO MIRANDA, HORLANDO MONTES and GERARDO ROJAS, Plaintiffs, v. B&M GENERAL RENOVATION INC., dba B&M GENERAL RENOVATION, MICHAEL LUONG and THERESA LUONG, Defendants.
MEMORANDUM & ORDER :
Plaintiff Rafael Morales commenced the above-captioned action on December 15, 2014, against Defendants B&M General Renovation, Inc. ("B&M"), Michael Luong and Theresa Luong. (Compl., Docket Entry No. 1.) On February 17, 2015, an Amended Complaint added Fernando Mirando, Horlando Montes and Gerardo Rojas, who had opted-in to the collective action, as Plaintiffs along with Morales. (Docket Entry No. 14.) Plaintiffs allege violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. ("FLSA"), and the New York Labor Law, N.Y. Lab. Law § 650 et seq. ("NYLL"). Although properly served with the summons and Amended Complaint, (Docket Entry Nos. 15, 16, 17), Defendants have failed to appear in this action. Plaintiffs sought and obtained a notice of default against B&M, Michael Luong and Theresa Luong. (Docket Entry Nos. 18, 20.) Plaintiffs subsequently moved for a default judgment. (Docket Entry No. 26.) On June 18, 2015, the Court referred this matter to Magistrate Judge Marilyn D. Go for a report and recommendation. (Order dated June 18, 2015.)
By report and recommendation dated March 9, 2016 (the "R&R"), Judge Go recommended that the Court grant Plaintiffs' motion for a default judgment against Defendants in the amount of $545,800.87, calculated as follows: (1) $79,358.00 in favor of Morales (consisting of $24,786.00 in overtime wages, $24,786.00 in liquidated damages pursuant to the FLSA, $24,786.00 in liquidated damages pursuant to the NYLL, and $5,000, for failure to provide various wage notices, pursuant to the NYLL); (2) $241,680.56 in favor of Miranda (consisting of $81,081.00 in overtime wages, $70,065.00 in liquidated damages pursuant to the FLSA, $81,081.00 in liquidated damages pursuant to the NYLL, $5,000, for failure to provide various wage notices, pursuant to the NYLL, and $4,453.56 in prejudgment interest); (3) $159,791.00 in favor of Montes (consisting of $51,597.00 in overtime wages, $51,597.00 in liquidated damages pursuant to the FLSA, $51,597.00 in liquidated damages pursuant to the NYLL, and $5,000, for failure to provide various wage notices, pursuant to the NYLL); (4) $55,985.00 in favor of Rojas (consisting of $16,995.00 in overtime wages, $16,995.00 in liquidated damages pursuant to the FLSA, $16,995.00 in liquidated damages pursuant to the NYLL, and $5,000, for failure to provide various wage notices, pursuant to the NYLL); (5) $8343.00 in attorneys' fees; and (6) $643.31 in costs. (R&R 23, 34-35.) Judge Go also recommended an award of statutory post-judgment interest. (Id. at 26.) No party has objected to the R&R and the time for doing so has passed.
Judge Go also recommended that the Court award prejudgment interest to Miranda at the rate of $2.67 per day from March 31, 2016 until the entry of judgement. (R&R 26.) --------
A district court reviewing a magistrate judge's recommended ruling "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). "[F]ailure to object to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation within the prescribed time limit may operate as a waiver of any further judicial review of the decision, as long as the parties receive clear notice of the consequences of their failure to object." Eustache v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 621 F. App'x 86, 87 (2d Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting United States v. Male Juvenile, 121 F.3d 34, 38 (2d Cir. 1997)); see also Almonte v. Suffolk Cty., 531 F. App'x 107, 109 (2d Cir. 2013) ("As a rule, a party's failure to object to any purported error or omission in a magistrate judge's report waives further judicial review of the point." (quoting Cephas v. Nash, 328 F.3d 98, 107 (2d Cir. 2003))); Wagner & Wagner, LLP v. Atkinson, Haskins, Nellis, Brittingham, Gladd & Carwile, P.C., 596 F.3d 84, 92 (2d Cir. 2010) ("[A] party waives appellate review of a decision in a magistrate judge's report and recommendation if the party fails to file timely objections designating the particular issue." (citing Cephas, 328 F.3d at 107)).
The Court has reviewed the unopposed R&R and, finding no clear error, the Court adopts Judge Go's R&R in its entirety pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiffs' motion for a default judgment against B&M, Michael Luong and Theresa Luong is granted. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgments in the amounts set forth above, and to close this case.
SO ORDERED:
s/ MKB
MARGO K. BRODIE
United States District Judge Dated: March 29, 2016
Brooklyn, New York