Fluker, Jr. v. Carr

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
ANTONIO LYNN FLUKER, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
GARY CARR,
Defendant.
Case No. 22-11992
Honorable Laurie J. Michelson
Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Stafford
ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIALS IN
SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT
(ECF NO. 54)
Pro se Plaintiff Antonio Lynn Fluker, Jr. sues Defendant Gary Carr,
alleging that he violated the Right to Financial Privacy Act (RFPA). ECF
No. 37. The Honorable Laurie J. Michelson referred the case to the
undersigned for all pretrial matters under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). ECF No.
44.
The Clerk of Court granted Fluker’s request for entry of default
against Carr but denied Fluker’s request for a default judgment of $100
million. ECF No. 51; ECF No. 52; ECF No. 53. The Clerk’s denial of a
Case 2:22-cv-11992-LJM-EAS ECF No. 55, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/30/25 Page 1 of 4

2
default judgment was proper because Fluker’s damage demand was not for
a sum certain, as required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(1).1
Fluker now moves the Court for a default judgment under Rule
55(b)(2), again asking for a judgment of $100 million. ECF No. 54. When
assessing a motion for default judgment, “the factual allegations of the
complaint, except those relating to the amount of damages, will be taken as
true.” 	New London Tobacco Mkt., Inc. v. Kentucky Fuel Corp., 44 F.4th
393, 403 (6th Cir. 2022) (cleaned up). Thus, the plaintiff must prove the
amount of damages for a default judgment. 	Id.
Fluker has not met his burden. In the declaration he relies to support
his motion, he claims without analysis that Carr owes him $100 million.
ECF No. 52, PageID.194-195; ECF No. 54, PageID.202. Fluker’s damage
is demand is both unproven and absurd.
Given Fluker’s pro se status, the Court will allow him to supplement
his damage demand, supported by proof of damages, no later than
November 21, 2025. 	If Fluker again makes an “outrageously excessive”
damage demand, the Court will recommend that his motion for default
judgment be denied altogether. 	Thomas v. Bannum Place of Saginaw, 421
1 Examples of sum certain claims are “actions on money judgments and
negotiable instruments”—claims that are liquidated or fixed. 	KPS &
Assocs., Inc. v. Designs by FMC, Inc., 318 F.3d 1, 19-20 (1st Cir. 2003).
Case 2:22-cv-11992-LJM-EAS ECF No. 55, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/30/25 Page 2 of 4

3
F. Supp. 3d 494, 499 (E.D. Mich. 2019), objections overruled, 2019 WL
13194618 (E.D. Mich. Dec. 9, 2019) (denying attorney’s fees altogether to
discourage others from making the type of “outrageously excessive” fee
requests like the one at issue).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Elizabeth A. Stafford
ELIZABETH A. STAFFORD
Dated: October 30, 2025 	United States Magistrate Judge
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES ABOUT OBJECTIONS
Within 14 days of being served with this order, any party may file
objections with the assigned district judge. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). The
district judge may sustain an objection only if the order is clearly erroneous
or contrary to law. 28 U.S.C. § 636. 	“When an objection is filed to a
magistrate judge’s ruling on a non-dispositive motion, the ruling
remains in full force and effect unless and until it is stayed by the
magistrate judge or a district judge.” 	E.D. Mich. LR 72.2.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Case 2:22-cv-11992-LJM-EAS ECF No. 55, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/30/25 Page 3 of 4

4
The undersigned certifies that this document was served on counsel
of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court’s ECF System to
their email or First Class U.S. mail addresses disclosed on the Notice of
Electronic Filing on October 30, 2025.
s/Davon Allen
DAVON ALLEN
Case Manager
Case 2:22-cv-11992-LJM-EAS ECF No. 55, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/30/25 Page 4 of 4