Perez v. Evolet's Painting Service LLC et al

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Luis Enrique Ramos Perez,
Plaintiff,
v.
Evolet's Painting Service LLC, et al.,
Defendants.
NO. CV-25-01886-PHX-ASB
ORDER
This matter was assigned to Magistrate Judge Alison S. Bachus. (Doc. 6). On
December 15, 2025, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)
recommending that the Court grant Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 12) and
award damages for unpaid and overtime wages against all Defendants. (Doc. 13).1 To date,
1 This case is assigned to a Magistrate Judge. However, not all parties have
consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge. Thus, the matter is before this Court
pursuant to General Order 21-25, which states in relevant part:
When a United States Magistrate Judge to whom a civil action has been
assigned pursuant to Local Rule 3.7(a)(1) considers dismissal to be
appropriate but lacks the jurisdiction to do so under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1)
due to incomplete status of election by the parties to consent or not consent
to the full authority of the Magistrate Judge,
IT IS ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge will prepare a Report and
Recommendation for the Chief United States District Judge or designee.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED designating the following District Court
Judges to review and, if deemed suitable, to sign the order of dismissal on
my behalf:
Phoenix/Prescott: Senior United States District Judge Stephen M.
McNamee
Case 2:25-cv-01886-SMM-ASB Document 14 Filed 01/20/26 Page 1 of 3

- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
no objections have been filed.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see Baxter v.
Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991). Parties have fourteen days from the service
of a copy of the Magistrate=s recommendation within which to file specific written
objections to the Court. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6, 72. Failure to object to a
Magistrate Judge=s recommendation relieves the Court of conducting de novo review of the
Magistrate Judge=s factual findings and waives all objections to those findings on appeal.
See Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998). A failure to object to a Magistrate
Judge=s conclusion “is a factor to be weighed in considering the propriety of finding waiver
of an issue on appeal.” Id.
DISCUSSION2
Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s R&R, Plaintiff’s Motion and supporting
affidavits, and no Objections having been made by any party thereto, the Court hereby
adopts the Magistrate Judge’s R&R. The Court finds that entry of default judgment and a
statutory damages award totaling $529.203 is appropriate in this matter. (Doc. 13).
CONCLUSION
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED adopting the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate
Judge. (Doc. 13).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment.
(Doc. 12).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Luis Enrique Ramos Perez is entitled
to judgement in the amount of $529.20 against all Defendants, in which they shall be jointly
and severally liable. This amount shall be subject to post-judgment interest at the applicable
2 The factual and procedural history of this case is set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s
Report and Recommendation (Doc. 13).
3 This is a trebled amount under the Arizona Minimum Wage Act (“AMWA”), which
engulfs Plaintiff’s wage damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”).
Case 2:25-cv-01886-SMM-ASB Document 14 Filed 01/20/26 Page 2 of 3

- 3 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
federal rate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court enter judgement
accordingly.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing Plaintiff to file a motion for attorney fees
and costs on or before February 3, 2026 pursuant to LRCiv 54.2.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of Court to terminate this action.
Dated this 20th day of January, 2026.
Case 2:25-cv-01886-SMM-ASB Document 14 Filed 01/20/26 Page 3 of 3