Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 31, 2025

Pinheiro v. Interior Mogul LLC and Leonardo de Almeida

Judge
Rearden
Docket
1:22-cv-09856
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
FlsaEmploymentCivil ProcedureFee Petition
In one sentence

In Felipe Pinheiro v. Interior Mogul LLC, Judge Rearden adopted the recommendation and awarded Pinheiro $37,710 in unpaid wages plus damages, fees, costs, and interest.

Who this affects

Felipe Pinheiro received a judgment for unpaid wages, additional damages, interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs against Interior Mogul LLC and Leonardo de Almeida, who were held jointly and severally responsible for the award.

What happened

Felipe Pinheiro sued Interior Mogul LLC and Leonardo de Almeida for unpaid wages and penalties under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. Neither defendant answered or appeared.

A magistrate judge recommended awarding Pinheiro unpaid wages, an equal amount in additional damages, interest, attorneys’ fees, and costs. The defendants did not object to that recommendation after being warned that failing to object would waive further judicial review.

In Felipe Pinheiro v. Interior Mogul LLC and Leonardo de Almeida, Judge Jennifer H. Rearden found no clear error and adopted the recommendation in full. The court awarded Pinheiro $37,710 in unpaid wages, $37,710 in additional damages, nine-percent prejudgment interest beginning January 13, 2021, $2,227.50 in attorneys’ fees, $942 in costs, and post-judgment interest.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Pinheiro v. Interior Mogul LLC and Leonardo de Almeida · No. 1:22-cv-09856
Judge
Rearden
Date
Oct. 31, 2025

Background

Felipe Pinheiro brought claims against Interior Mogul LLC and Leonardo de Almeida for unpaid wages and statutory penalties under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New York Labor Law (NYLL). The opinion states that the defendants were served but did not answer or otherwise appear.

The Clerk entered defaults against both defendants. The court later referred the case to Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger for an inquest—an examination of the evidence needed to determine the amount of damages after a defendant’s default. Judge Lehrburger issued a Report and Recommendation advising that judgment be entered for Pinheiro.

Review of the Recommendation

The Report and Recommendation advised the parties that they had 14 days to file written objections and warned that failing to object would waive the right to object and prevent appellate review. Pinheiro served the recommendation on the defendants. No objections or requests for more time were filed.

Because no timely objections were made, Judge Rearden reviewed the recommendation for clear error rather than reconsidering the issues from the beginning. The court found no clear error and described the recommendation as well-reasoned and supported by the facts and law.

Ruling

The court adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety and awarded Pinheiro judgment against the defendants, jointly and severally, meaning each defendant is responsible for the full award. The monetary relief was:

- $37,710 in unpaid wages; - $37,710 in liquidated damages on the unpaid wages; - Prejudgment interest on the unpaid wages at 9 percent beginning January 13, 2021; - $2,227.50 in attorneys’ fees; - $942 in costs; and - Post-judgment interest under 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a) on the full judgment.

The court ordered Pinheiro to serve the order on each defendant by November 7, 2025, and to file an affidavit confirming service. After judgment was entered, the Clerk was directed to terminate pending motions and close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.