1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

Case No. ________________________________

RADENIS LLANES,

Plaintiff,

v.

AIRLINE TRAINING ACADEMY OF 

MIAMI USA, LLC, a Florida limited liability 

company d/b/a ATA FLIGHT SCHOOL and 

MICHAEL PUNZIANO, individually,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

COMPLAINT FOR FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT OVERTIME VIOLATIONS

Plaintiff, RADENIS LLANES, through undersigned counsel, files this Complaint for 

violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act against Defendants AIRLINE TRAINING ACADEMY 

OF MIAMI USA, LLC, a Florida limited liability company d/b/a ATA FLIGHT SCHOOL

(“ATA”) and MICHAEL PUNZIANO (“Punziano”) (collectively, “Defendants”) seeking unpaid 

overtime wages, and alleges:

JURISDICTION, VENUE, AND GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

1. This is an action arising under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-219 

(the “Act” or the “FLSA”) to recover money damages for unpaid overtime wages.

2. The Plaintiff was a resident of Broward County, Florida at the time this dispute 

arose. He is still a resident of Broward County, Florida.

3. Defendant ATA is a Florida limited liability company with its principal address 

located in Broward County, Florida at 1620 S.W. 75th Ave., Pembroke Pines, FL 33023, and which 

regularly transacts business within the Southern District of Florida, including in Broward County, 

Case 0:20-cv-60958-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 1 of 6
2

Florida within the jurisdiction of this Court. The Defendant was an employer of Plaintiff during 

the relevant time period described below.

4. Plaintiff is informed and believes that at all material times hereto, Defendant 

Punziano was and is presently a resident of Broward County, Florida.

5. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Section 216 of the Act. This Court has 

federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 as this civil action arises under the laws of 

the United States.

6. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because Defendant ATA resides in 

Broward County, Florida and all Defendants reside in the State of Florida. Venue is also proper 

because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to this claim occurred in Broward 

County, Florida, within the jurisdiction of this Court.

7. 29 U.S.C. §207(a)(1) states, “Except as otherwise provided in this section, no 

employer shall employ any of his employees who in any workweek is engaged in commerce or in 

the production of goods for commerce, or is employed in an enterprise engaged in commerce or in 

the production of goods for commerce, for a workweek longer than forty hours unless such 

employee receives compensation for his employment in excess of the hours above specified at a 

rate not less than one and one-half times the regular rate at which he is employed.”

8. Defendants’ business activities involve those to which the Act applies. Both the 

Defendants’ business and Plaintiff’s work for the Defendants affected interstate commerce for the 

relevant time period. Plaintiff’s work for the Defendants affected interstate commerce during the 

relevant time period because he handled materials and goods, specifically including airplane fuel, 

that moved through interstate commerce prior to Plaintiff’s use of the same. Those goods and 

Case 0:20-cv-60958-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 2 of 6
3

materials were used on a constant and/or continual basis and were supplied to him by Defendants

to use on the job.

9. During the relevant time period, Plaintiff worked for ATA primarily as an airplane 

fueler. The fuel and equipment Plaintiff utilized in connection with his job had moved through 

interstate commerce. The Plaintiff’s work for the Defendant was actually in and/or so closely 

related to the movement of commerce while he worked for the Defendant that the Act applies to 

Plaintiff’s work for the Defendant.

10. Additionally, Defendant regularly employed two or more employees for the 

relevant time period who handled goods or materials that traveled through interstate commerce, or 

used instrumentalities of interstate commerce, thus making Defendants’ business an enterprise 

covered under the Fair Labor Standard Act. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that a majority of 

the goods used by the Defendants in connection with its business were produced outside of the 

State of Florida.

11. Defendants obtain and solicit funds from non-Florida sources, accept funds from 

non-Florida sources, use telephonic transmissions going over state lines to do their business, 

transmit funds outside the State of Florida, and otherwise regularly engage in interstate commerce.

12. Plaintiff is informed that the Defendant limited liability company had gross sales 

or business done in excess of $500,000 in both 2018 and 2019.

13. Upon information and belief, the Defendant limited liability company’s gross sales 

or business was expected to exceed $500,000 for the year 2020 as of early April 2020.

14. At all times material hereto, Defendant Punziano was an owner and authorized 

member of ATA and was a direct or indirect supervisor and employer of Plaintiff within the 

meaning of 29 U.S.C. 203(d). Among other things, Punziano had the power to hire and fire 

Case 0:20-cv-60958-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 3 of 6
4

employees, supervised and controlled Plaintiff’s work schedule and conditions of employment,

and determined the rate and method of payment for Plaintiff.

15. Plaintiff was employed by Defendants from approximately April 9, 2018 through 

his termination in early April 2020.

16. ATA operates an airline training academy located at the North Perry Airport in 

Pembroke Pines, Florida.

17. Plaintiff was employed by ATA primarily as an airplane fueler of flights conducted 

by ATA.

18. While employed by Defendants, other than a period of time in which Plaintiff was 

paid $8.00 per hour during April and May 2018, Plaintiff was paid at a rate of $12.00 per hour 

worked.

19. Plaintiff worked for ATA an average of approximately 57 hours per week over the 

relevant period.

20. Although Plaintiff was paid an hourly rate for all hours he worked, Defendants did 

not pay any overtime pay to Plaintiff for the hours he worked in excess of 40 in any given 

workweek.

21. Defendants willfully and intentionally refused to pay Plaintiff overtime pay during 

the three years preceding the filing of the Complaint as required by the Act since Defendants were 

aware of the overtime requirements of the Act and recklessly failed to investigate whether 

Defendants’ payroll practices were in accordance with the Act. 

22. Defendants owe Plaintiff overtime wages for the period beginning in April 2018 

through Plaintiff’s termination in early April 2020.

Case 0:20-cv-60958-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 4 of 6
5

23. Prior to the completion of discovery and to the best of Plaintiff’s knowledge, at the 

time of the filing of this Complaint, Plaintiff’s good faith estimate and calculation of unpaid 

overtime wages and liquidated damages (exclusive of costs and attorneys’ fees) are contained on 

the Statement of Claim attached hereto as Exhibit 1.

24. Plaintiff has retained the undersigned law firm to represent him in this action and 

is obligated to pay a reasonable attorneys’ fee.

COUNT I: VIOLATION OF OVERTIME PROVISIONS OF THE FAIR LABOR 

STANDARDS ACT (AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS)

25. Plaintiff incorporates and re-adopts the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-24

above as if set out in full herein. 

26. During the relevant period of Plaintiff’s employment (during the 3 years prior to 

the filing of this Complaint through his termination), Defendants did not pay Plaintiff overtime 

wages for each hour over 40 that Plaintiff worked in any given workweek.

27. As such, Defendants owe Plaintiff overtime wages pursuant to the FLSA.

28. Defendants failed to properly disclose or apprise Plaintiff of his rights under the 

FLSA.

29. Because of Defendants’ willful, intentional, and reckless violations of the FLSA’s 

overtime provisions, Plaintiff has been damaged in the amount of unpaid overtime wages and is 

also entitled to an additional equal amount as liquidated damages. Defendants have acted neither 

in good faith nor with reasonable grounds to believe that their acts and/or omissions were not a 

violation of the FLSA. 

30. Plaintiff is entitled to an award of his reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant 

to 29 USC 216(b).

Case 0:20-cv-60958-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 5 of 6
6

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court enter judgment for Plaintiff 

against Defendants, jointly and severally, on the basis of the Defendants’ willful violations of the 

FLSA, award Plaintiff actual damages in the amount shown to be due for unpaid overtime 

compensation for hours worked in excess of forty weekly, award Plaintiff an equal amount in 

liquidated damages, award Plaintiff reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit, and grant such 

other and further relief as this Court deems equitable and just. 

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands trial by jury of all issues so triable as of right. 

Dated: May 13, 2020 Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Harris Nizel

HARRIS NIZEL (Florida Bar No.: 0807931)

Email: harris@nizel.com

Nizel Law, P.A.

4700 Sheridan St., Suite J 

Hollywood, FL 33021

Telephone: (954) 653-8300

Counsel for Plaintiff

Case 0:20-cv-60958-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 6 of 6