Chao v. Telecommunications Support Systems, Inc.

Full title: ELAINE L. CHAO, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor…

Court: United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Jul 25, 2005

CV 03-625-BR (D. Or. Jul. 25, 2005)

Opinion

CV 03-625-BR.

July 25, 2005

ROCHELLE KLEINBERG Associate Regional Solicitor BRUCE L. BROWN United States Department of Labor Office of the Solicitor Seattle, WA, Attorneys for Plaintiff.

TODD MARSHALL Molalla, OR, Defendant, Pro Se.

OPINION AND ORDER

ANNA BROWN, District Judge

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment on the Issue of Damages (#51).

Plaintiff brought this action against Defendants for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq. The Court previously entered default judgments against Defendants Telecommunications Support Systems, Inc. (TSSI), and Keith McCollum. The Court also granted summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff on the issue of Defendant Todd Marshall's liability. Plaintiff now moves for summary judgment on the issue of the appropriate amount of damages for which Marshall is liable. Marshall did not respond to Plaintiff's Motion.

For the reasons that follow, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion.

FACTS

Marshall did not respond to Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court, therefore, deems admitted the facts set forth in Plaintiff's Concise Statement of Material Facts. See LR 56.1(f).

Marshall was President and co-owner of TSSI until January 6, 2003. During Marshall's tenure with TSSI, employees were not appropriately paid for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week. The uncontradicted evidence shows TSSI employees are owed back wages in the amount of $52,574.66.

STANDARDS

Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c) authorizes summary judgment if no genuine issue exists regarding any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The moving party must show the absence of an issue of material fact. Leisek v. Brightwood Corp., 278 F.3d 895, 898 (9^th Cir. 2002). In response to a properly supported motion for summary judgment, the nonmoving party must go beyond the pleadings and show there is a genuine issue of material fact for trial. Id.

DISCUSSION

Marshall has not responded to Plaintiff's Motion nor submitted any evidence to controvert Plaintiff's assessment of the amount of back wages due TSSI employees. Accordingly, based on the record, the Court finds Plaintiff is entitled to judgment against Marshall in the amount of $52,574.66.

CONCLUSION

For these reasons, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment on the Issue of Damages (#51). Plaintiff shall submit a form of Judgment consistent with this Opinion and Order no later than August 8, 2005.

IT IS SO ORDERED.