Lesnik v.Eisenmann SE
- Beth Freeman
- 5:16-cv-01120
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 19
Lesnik v. Eisenmann SE: Judge Koh denied Stjepan Papes’s third default-judgment motion on Fair Labor Standards Act claims.
Stjepan Papes and the defendants named in his Fair Labor Standards Act default-judgment motion: ISM Vuzem d.o.o., ISM Vuzem USA, Inc., Vuzem USA, Inc., Robert Vuzem, Ivan Vuzem, and HRID-Mont d.o.o.
What happened
In Lesnik v. Eisenmann SE, Stjepan Papes asked the court to enter judgment because several defendants had not defended against his claims that they failed to pay minimum wage and overtime. He alleged that he worked in the United States, including at a Tesla facility, and was underpaid and not paid for overtime.
The court found that it had federal-question jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction over ISM Vuzem d.o.o., ISM Vuzem USA, Inc., Vuzem USA, Inc., Robert Vuzem, and Ivan Vuzem, and that those defendants had been properly served. It found no personal jurisdiction over HRID-Mont d.o.o. The court also found problems with Papes’s wage calculations, payment information, and treatment of travel time when calculating overtime.
Judge Koh denied without prejudice Papes’s third motion for default judgment against the five defendants with established jurisdiction, allowing another motion if the identified problems were corrected. She denied the motion against HRID-Mont d.o.o. without the opinion adding a prejudice qualifier. The court required any fourth motion to be filed within 30 days.
The detailed version
- Lesnik v.Eisenmann SE · No. 5:16-cv-01120
- Beth Freeman
- Sept. 20, 2021
Background
Stjepan Papes filed a third motion for default judgment on claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act against ISM Vuzem d.o.o., ISM Vuzem USA, Inc., Vuzem USA, Inc., Robert Vuzem, Ivan Vuzem, and HRID-Mont d.o.o. The claims alleged failures to pay the federal minimum wage and overtime compensation. The opinion states that Papes was allegedly hired by ISM Vuzem d.o.o., brought to the United States to work at various locations between 2013 and 2015, and paid below the minimum wage while working long hours.
Jurisdiction and Service
The court concluded that it had subject-matter jurisdiction because the claims arose under federal law. It found general personal jurisdiction over Vuzem USA, Inc. because it was a California corporation and dissolved after the alleged violations. It found specific personal jurisdiction over ISM Vuzem d.o.o., ISM Vuzem USA, Inc., Robert Vuzem, and Ivan Vuzem based on alleged connections to construction work in California and the United States, including work at the Tesla manufacturing plant in Fremont, California. The court also found that those five defendants had been properly served.
The court concluded that Papes had not provided sufficient allegations showing specific personal jurisdiction over HRID-Mont d.o.o. The court therefore denied the motion for default judgment as to HRID-Mont d.o.o.
Default-Judgment Analysis
A default judgment is a judgment entered against a party that failed to plead or otherwise defend. The court applied the factors described in Eitel v. McCool, which guide the discretionary decision whether to enter default judgment. The first factor favored judgment because Papes would be prejudiced if he had no other way to recover from defendants that had not participated in the case.
The court then examined the alleged minimum-wage and overtime claims, accepting well-pleaded liability allegations as true for purposes of the analysis. It found that Papes used the wrong federal minimum wage in his calculations: the statute set the rate at $7.25 per hour, not $7.50. The court also found unclear and contradictory allegations about the number of months Papes worked and the number of monthly payments he received, including whether he received a full monthly payment for a partial month.
For the overtime claim, the court found that Papes appeared to include travel time between employer-provided housing and job sites in his hours worked. The court stated that he had not provided sufficient allegations showing that this travel time was integral and indispensable to his principal job activities, as required under the applicable legal standard. Without clarification about compensable travel time or a calculation excluding that travel time, the court could not determine the relevant hours or potential liability.
Disposition
The court denied without prejudice Papes’s third motion for default judgment on the Fair Labor Standards Act claims against ISM Vuzem d.o.o., ISM Vuzem USA, Inc., Vuzem USA, Inc., Robert Vuzem, and Ivan Vuzem. The court stated that Papes could file a fourth motion within 30 days that corrected the deficiencies and explained the requested damages in table form, identifying the source and calculation method for each number. The court denied Papes’s third motion for default judgment against HRID-Mont d.o.o.; that ruling was stated without a prejudice qualifier. The order was signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh.
Read the full 19-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.