Opinion
2:23-cv-544-JLB-KCD
06-18-2024
EMMANUEL PIMENTEL, RANCEL MORENO, JOHNNY CUEVAS, RAMON CUEVAS, ADAM OROZCO, IRVIN MALDONADO, TRENT BARKER, CHRISTOPHER CAMPBELL, KHADEJHA DUBOSE, JOHN FABIEN, TOMAS SANCHEZ, TERRANCE STOUTE, RAYMOND WALLS, ALFRED CLARK, ALEXANDER DIAZ-BENITEZ, CARLOS GUERRA, RAFAEL ARMANDO LEVYA MARTINEZ, LENIER MACHIN, JORGE QUINONES, JACOB POWELL, FIDEL RODRIGUEZ, TAYLOR SAMS, RONALD THOMAS and ANYEL DELGADO, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. STRENGTH20, LLC, GLOBAL STRATEGIES CONSULTANT GROUP, CORP., ROMMEL A. ARIZA and FLORIDA STRUCTURAL GROUP, INC., Defendants.
ORDER
Kyle C. Dudek United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiffs sue under the Fair Labor Standards Act. They allege Defendants (their former employers) did not pay minimum wage or overtime as required. (See Doc. 1.)
Unless otherwise indicated, all internal quotation marks, citations, and alterations have been omitted in this and later citations.
Plaintiffs now ask the Court to hold Defendants Strength20, LLC and Rommel Ariza (collectively “Defendants”) in default under Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(a). (Doc. 127.) But Rule 55(a) only triggers when a party “has failed to plead or otherwise defend.” (Id.) Defendants have appeared, answered the complaint, and engaged in discovery. Indeed, Defendants filed a brief contesting a discovery issue just a few weeks ago. (Doc. 121.) Default “would not be appropriate” on these facts. Deforest v. Johnny Chisholm Glob. Events, LLC, No. 3:08CV498MCREMT, 2010 WL 1792094, at *9 (N.D. Fla. May 4, 2010); see also Montecalvo v. Brandon Auto Clinic, Inc., No. 8:07-CV-851-T-30MSS, 2007 WL 2155581, at *1 (M.D. Fla. July 26, 2007).
Plaintiffs' real problem, as best the Court can tell, is that Defendants have stalled the orderly progression of this case. For instance, Defendants have twice been ordered to produce discovery. And most recently, they failed to appear for a duly noticed deposition. (See Doc. 127 at 2-3.) The Court in no way condones such conduct. But the proper mechanism to hold Defendants accountable is Rule 37, not Rule 55. See Malautea v. Suzuki Motor Co., 987 F.2d 1536, 1542 (11th Cir. 1993) (explaining that Rule 37 provides district courts “broad discretion to fashion appropriate sanctions” for discovery violations and non-compliance).
Accordingly, Plaintiffs' Motion for Clerk's Default (Doc. 127) is DENIED.
ORDERED.