1 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO.: _________________ 

LAZARO FACIO, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

F3 INTERNATIONAL RESOURCES, INC., 

OCTAGON STRATEGIC SERVICES, LLC, 

and LORIN M. JACOBSON, individually, 

 Defendants. 

____________________________________/ 

COMPLAINT 

 Plaintiff Lazaro Facio (“Facio” or “Plaintiff”), by and through undersigned 

counsel, hereby files this Complaint and sues F3 International Resources, Inc. 

(“F3”), Octagon Strategic Services, LLC (“Octagon”), and Lorin M. Jacobson 

(“Jacobson”)(collectively “Defendants”) and alleges as follows: 

Introduction 

1. This is an action by Facio for unpaid overtime wages under the Fair 

Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq. (“FLSA”). Further, Facio asserts 

claims for breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and quantum meruit to seek, 

as damages, wages due and owing, predicated on a breach of the Employment 

Agreement. Facio’s breach of contract counts, and associated damages, are filed 

separate and apart from Facio’s unpaid overtime wage claims. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 1 of 27
2 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

2. Facio seeks damages within this court’s jurisdictional requirements, 

reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, and all other remedies allowable by law. 

Parties, Jurisdiction and Venue 

3. Facio has, at all relevant times, resided in Miami-Dade County, 

Florida. 

4. F3 is a Florida corporation and operates worldwide. As part of its 

operations, it performs business and has its headquarters in Miami-Dade 

County, Florida. 

5. Octagon is a Florida corporation and operates worldwide. As part of 

its operations, it performs business and has its headquarters in Miami-Dade 

County, Florida. 

6. Jacobson is the owner and operator of F3 and is believed to also be 

a principal/officer for Octagon. Upon information and belief, Jacobson runs 

these companies from Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

7. F3 and Octagon are Facio’s employers, joint employers, or coemployers for purposes of the FLSA as the term employer is defined by 29 U.S.C. 

§ 203 during some or all of the relevant period. 

8. Venue is proper in this Court because Defendants transact business 

in this District, Defendants maintains a principal place of business in this 

District, Defendants employed Plaintiff in this District, and the claims arose 

within this District. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 2 of 27
3 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

A. Defendants' Business and Interstate Commerce. 

9. F3 is a company that provides security training, security technology, 

consulting, and various levels of protection for its clients.1 F3 represents on its 

website a worldwide network of clients and services. 

10. Similarly, Octagon provides security and risk assessment services 

as well as consulting, intelligence gathering, and asset recovery.2 Octagon also 

represents on its website a worldwide network of clients, training offices, and 

services. 

11. Upon information and belief, F3’s annual volume of sales or 

business exceeded $500,000 annually for every relevant year. 

12. Upon information and belief, Octagon’s annual volume of sales or 

business exceeded $500,000 annually for every relevant year. 

13. At all relevant times, F3 employed two or more employees, including 

Plaintiff, that customarily, continually, and regularly handled goods and 

materials that i) were purchased from a person or entity outside the state of 

Florida and/or ii) were purchased in Florida but had previously traveled through 

interstate commerce. 

14. At all relevant times, Octagon employed two or more employees, 

including Plaintiff, that customarily, continually, and regularly handled goods 

and materials that i) were purchased from a person or entity outside the state of 

1 This information is gathered from F3’s website: http://www.f3ir.com/services.html

2 This information is gathered from Octagon’s website: https://osselite.com/services 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 3 of 27
4 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

Florida and/or ii) were purchased in Florida but had previously traveled through 

interstate commerce. 

15. Upon information and belief, F3 obtained and solicited funds from 

non-Florida sources, accepted funds from non-Florida sources, used telephonic 

transmissions going over state lines to do its business, transmitted funds outside 

the State of Florida, used electronic means to market and run their business in 

a way that was not limited to Florida, and otherwise regularly engaged in 

interstate commerce during the relevant period. 

16. Upon information and belief, Octagon obtained and solicited funds 

from non-Florida sources, accepted funds from non-Florida sources, used 

telephonic transmissions going over state lines to do its business, transmitted 

funds outside the State of Florida, used electronic means to market and run their 

business in a way that was not limited to Florida, and otherwise regularly 

engaged in interstate commerce during the relevant period. 

17. F3, upon information and belief, accept credit card payments, wire 

transfers, and other forms of payments that are made or processed outside the 

state of Florida. 

18. Octagon, upon information and belief, accept credit card payments, 

wire transfers, and other forms of payments that are made or processed outside 

the state of Florida. 

19. F3 is an employer engaged in interstate commerce and subject to 

the wage & hour provisions of the FLSA. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 4 of 27
5 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

20. Octagon is an employer engaged in interstate commerce and subject 

to the wage & hour provisions of the FLSA. 

21. F3 and Octagon are Facio’s employers, joint employers, or coemployers for purposes of the FLSA as the term employer is defined by 29 U.S.C. 

§ 203 during some or all of the relevant period. 

B. Plaintiff’s Employment with Defendants and Overtime Claims.

22. Facio was hired by Defendants, through a written employment offer 

letter, to start on January 11, 2019. See Exhibit A.

23. Facio was hired as a Gold and Metals Specialist and was to be paid 

an annual salary of $120,000.00. See Exhibit A.

24. Facio was to “[p]erform all job duties as assigned by management. 

You will be responsible for assignments related to Gold, Metals and 

transportation and refining of same.” See Exhibit A.

25. On February 19, 2019, Facio was informed there would be a 

temporary payroll suspension but that he would be paid in full for any missed 

payroll payments. See Exhibit B. 

26. Despite this “temporary payroll suspension”, Facio continued to 

execute his duties for Defendants. 

27. During Facio’s employment with Defendants, he worked over forty 

hours a week on several occasions. 

28. Facio was never paid overtime premium for overtime hours worked. 

29. Facio seeks these unpaid overtime wages and liquidated damages. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 5 of 27
6 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

30. During Facio’s employment, Defendants failed to track or otherwise 

record all work hours. 

31. Facio continued working for Defendants without any wages until 

November 11, 2019 when Defendants unilaterally terminated his employment. 

The notice of “temporary lay-off” was signed by Jacobson. See Exhibit C.

C. Defendants’ Joint Employment of Facio. 

32. As set forth in the employment offer letter, Facio was to provide his 

services as a gold and metal specialist for both Defendants. See Exhibit A.

33. As set forth in the employment offer letter, Facio’s travel expenses 

would be paid for by both Defendants. See Exhibit A.

34. As set forth in the employment offer letter, Facio’s transportation 

(company vehicle) would be supplied for by both Defendants. See Exhibit A.

35. As set forth in the employment offer letter, Facio’s insurance would 

be paid for by both Defendants. See Exhibit A.

36. As set forth in the employment offer letter, Facio’s travel expenses 

would be paid for by both Defendants. See Exhibit A.

37. As set forth in the employment offer letter, Facio, after agreeing to 

this offer, was to send copies to both Defendants. See Exhibit A.

38. Finally, the offer letter explicitly states that Octagon is an F3 

company. See Exhibit A.

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 6 of 27
7 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

D. Defendants’ Breach Of Contract. 

39. As noted above, Facio and Defendants entered into a legally binding 

agreement where Facio was to work as a Gold and Metals Specialist and to 

receive an annual salary of $120,000.00, paid bi-weekly. See Exhibit A. 

40. On February 15, 2019, Defendants breached this agreement when 

the unilateral decision was made to suspend all payroll payments. This breach 

was memorialized in a written letter. See Exhibit B.

41. In that February 15, 2019 letter, Defendants represented that by the 

“middle part of October 2019, you will be fully paid for your entire missed payroll 

payments.” See Exhibit B.

42. Defendants February 15, 2019 promise to tender all missed payroll 

payments never occurred. Rather, on November 11, 2019, Defendants 

terminated the agreement with Facio under the guise of “temporary lay-offs”. See

Exhibit C.

43. In that November 11, 2019 letter, Defendants, again, promised that 

“any outstanding payroll to be delivered immediately.” See Exhibit C. Again, 

Defendants failed to tender any outstanding wages under the agreement. 

44. Due to Defendants’ breach, Facio was damaged and is owed 

$90.000.00 pursuant to the agreement. This is predicated on Facio’s monthly 

wages of $10,000.00 over the course of his nine (9) month employment. 

45. Facio seeks payment for his unpaid wages separate and apart from 

his FLSA overtime claim. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 7 of 27
8 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

COUNT I 

OVERTIME VIOLATIONS BY F3 

UNDER THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT 

46. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in 

paragraphs 1 through 38 above as if fully set forth herein. 

47. Upon information and belief, F3’s annual volume of sales or 

business exceeded $500,000.00 during each calendar year of the relevant period. 

48. As part of its business, F3 purchased goods and materials that 

traveled through interstate commerce during the relevant period. 

49. During the relevant period, F3 obtained and solicited funds from 

non-Florida sources, accepted funds from non-Florida sources, used telephonic 

transmissions going over state lines to do its business, transmitted funds outside 

the State of Florida, and otherwise regularly engaged in interstate commerce. 

50. During the relevant period, F3, upon information and belief, 

accepted credit card payments, wire transfers, and other forms of payments that 

were made or processed outside the state of Florida. 

51. During the relevant period, F3 was an employer engaged in 

interstate commerce and subject to the FLSA. 

52. During his employment with F3, Facio worked overtime hours. 

53. Despite knowledge of Facio’s work hours F3, however, failed to 

properly calculate (and then pay) Facio overtime wages. 

54. In addition, F3 is liable for double the overtime amounts owed as 

liquidated damages under the FLSA as a result of its intentional and willful 

violation of the FLSA. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 8 of 27
9 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

WHEREFORE, Facio respectfully requests that the Court: 

a. Enter judgment for Facio against F3 under the FLSA; 

b. Award Facio actual damages for the unpaid wages; 

c. Award Facio liquidated damages; 

d. Award Facio his attorneys’ fees and costs; 

e. Award Facio all recoverable interest; and 

f. Award any other relief this Honorable Court deems just and proper. 

COUNT II 

OVERTIME VIOLATIONS BY OCTAGON 

UNDER THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT 

55. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in 

paragraphs 1 through 38 above as if fully set forth herein. 

56. Upon information and belief, Octagon’s annual volume of sales or 

business exceeded $500,000.00 during each calendar year of the relevant period. 

57. As part of its business, Octagon purchased goods and materials that 

traveled through interstate commerce during the relevant period. 

58. During the relevant period, Octagon obtained and solicited funds 

from non-Florida sources, accepted funds from non-Florida sources, used 

telephonic transmissions going over state lines to do its business, transmitted 

funds outside the State of Florida, and otherwise regularly engaged in interstate 

commerce. 

59. During the relevant period, Octagon, upon information and belief, 

accepted credit card payments, wire transfers, and other forms of payments that 

were made or processed outside the state of Florida. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 9 of 27
10 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

60. During the relevant period, Octagon was an employer engaged in 

interstate commerce and subject to the FLSA. 

61. During his employment with Octagon, Facio worked overtime hours. 

62. Despite knowledge of Facio’s work hours Octagon, however, failed to 

properly calculate (and then pay) Facio overtime wages. 

63. In addition, Octagon is liable for double the overtime amounts owed 

as liquidated damages under the FLSA as a result of its intentional and willful 

violation of the FLSA. 

WHEREFORE, Facio respectfully requests that the Court: 

a. Enter judgment for Facio against Octagon under the FLSA; 

b. Award Facio actual damages for the unpaid wages; 

c. Award Facio liquidated damages; 

d. Award Facio his attorneys’ fees and costs; 

e. Award Facio all recoverable interest; and 

f. Award any other relief this Honorable Court deems just and proper. 

COUNT III 

OVERTIME VIOLATIONS AGAINST JACOBSON 

UNDER THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT 

64. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in 

paragraphs 1 through 38 above as if fully set forth herein. 

65. During the relevant period, Jacobson was an owner, corporate 

officer, and operator of Defendants F3 and Octagon. 

66. During the relevant period, Jacobson operated the day-to-day 

activities of Defendants F3 and Octagon, had supervisory authority over Facio 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 10 of 27
11 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

and other employees, had the ability to hire and fire employees along with terms 

of employment, could legally bind Defendants F3 and Octagon, and was partially 

or totally responsible for paying Facio and other employees. 

67. Jacobson was Plaintiff’s employer, joint employer, or co-employer for 

purposes of the FLSA as the term employer is defined by 29 U.S.C. § 203 during 

the relevant period. 

68. Plaintiff is owed unpaid overtime compensation pursuant to the 

FLSA. 

69. Jacobson is jointly and severally liable for double the overtime 

amounts owed as liquidated damages under the FLSA as a result of his 

intentional and willful violation of the FLSA. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court: 

a. Enter judgment against Jacobson under the FLSA; 

b. Award Plaintiff actual damages for the unpaid wages; 

c. Award Plaintiff liquidated damages; 

d. Award Plaintiff her attorneys’ fees and costs; 

e. Award Plaintiff all recoverable interest; and 

f. Award any other relief this Honorable Court deems just and proper. 

COUNT IV 

BREACH OF CONTRACT AGAINST F3 

70. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in 

paragraphs 1-10, 22-26, 31-45 above as if fully set forth herein. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 11 of 27
12 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

71. F3 and Facio entered into an agreement under which Facio would 

work as a Gold and Metals Specialist and be paid an annual salary of 

$120,000.00. See Exhibit A.

72. The agreement always required some level of payment when Facio 

worked for F3. 

73. The agreement never allowed F3 to completely deprive Facio of his 

salary. Further, the agreement required that Facio would be paid his salary biweekly. These are material terms. 

74. Contrary to the agreement, however, F3 refused to pay Facio his 

salary starting on February 15, 2019 when it “temporarily” and unilaterally 

suspended bi-weekly payroll. See Exhibit B. 

75. Facio continued to work for F3 until November 11, 2019 when F3 

terminated Facio’s employment. 

76. F3 failed to tender any of Facio’s due and owing salary. 

77. The continued failures to pay Facio his salary, despite working for 

F3, was a material breach of the agreement. 

78. Facio was, and continues to be, undoubtedly damaged by F3’s 

breach of the agreement because Facio never received funds he was legally 

entitled to. 

WHEREFORE, Facio demands judgment in his favor and against F3 for 

damages plus interest, attorney’s fees pursuant to Fla. Stat. §448.08, costs, and 

such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 12 of 27
13 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

COUNT V 

UNJUST ENRICHMENT/CONTRACT IMPLIED IN LAW AGAINST F3 

(In the Alternative) 

79. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in 

paragraphs 1-10, 22-26, 31-45 above as if fully set forth herein. 

80. This Count is being asserted in the alternative and only to the extent 

F3 denies the existence or enforceability of an express written contract between 

the parties as set forth in this Complaint. 

81. Facio performed services as a Golds and Metals Specialist for the 

benefit of F3 during his employment with F3. 

82. In exchange for his services, F3 agreed to pay Facio an annual salary 

of $120,000.00. See Exhibit A.

83. Facio continued to work for F3 because of this agreement. 

84. F3, however, failed to pay Facio, starting February 15, 2019, his 

biweekly salary and continued to withhold Facio’s salary through the end of his 

employment, November 11, 2019. 

85. While F3 accepted Facio’s services and retained the benefits 

associated with same, F3 did not pay Facio for hiw work. 

86. F3’s retention of all the value of Facio’s work without distribution of 

the agreed-upon salary is improper. 

87. Given F3’s misconduct and because it will receive a windfall by 

accepting and retaining the benefit conferred by Facio, the circumstances are 

such that it would be inequitable for F3 to retain the benefit without paying fair 

value for it. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 13 of 27
14 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

88. Assuming F3 denies the existence of an express agreement with 

Facio, as set forth in this Complaint, there is no adequate remedy at law with 

respect to compensation owed to Facio. 

WHEREFORE, Facio demands judgment in his favor and against Infinity 

for damages plus interest, attorney’s fees pursuant to Fla. Stat. §448.08, costs, 

and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. 

COUNT VI 

QUANTUM MERUIT/CONTRACT IMPLIED IN FACT AGAINST F3 

(In the Alternative) 

89. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in 

paragraphs 1-10 above as if fully set forth herein. 

90. This Count is being asserted in the alternative and only to the extent 

F3 denies the existence or enforceability of an express written contract between 

the parties as set forth in this Complaint. 

91. Facio performed services as a Golds and Metals Specialist for the 

benefit of F3 during his employment with F3. 

92. In exchange for his services, F3 agreed to pay Facio an annual salary 

of $120,000.00. 

93. Facio continued to work for F3 because of this agreement. 

94. F3, however, failed to pay Facio, starting February 15, 2019, his 

biweekly salary and continued to withhold Facio’s salary through the end of his 

employment, November 11, 2019. 

95. While F3 accepted Facio’s services and retained the benefits 

associated with same, F3 did not pay Facio for hiw work. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 14 of 27
15 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

96. F3’s retention of all the value of Facio’s work without distribution of 

the agreed-upon salary is improper. 

97. Given F3’s misconduct and because it will receive a windfall by 

accepting and retaining the benefit conferred by Facio, the circumstances are 

such that it would be inequitable for F3 to retain the benefit without paying fair 

value for it. 

98. F3 was fully aware that Facio expected to receive compensation for 

his work. 

99. Furthermore, the services performed by Facio were specifically 

required by F3. 

100. F3had full knowledge of the services and reaped the benefits of 

Facio’s labor. 

101. The course of conduct between the parties created a contract implied 

in fact under which Facio would be compensated for the valuable services he 

rendered in a specific manner. 

102. By denying Facio compensation due to him, F3 has been unjustly 

enriched. 

103. Assuming F3 denies the existence of an express Agreement with 

Facio, as set forth in this Complaint, there is no adequate remedy at law with 

respect to compensation owed to Facio. 

WHEREFORE, Facio demands judgment in its favor and against F3 for 

damages plus interest, attorney’s fees pursuant to Fla. Stat. §448.08, costs, and 

such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 15 of 27
16 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

COUNT VII 

BREACH OF CONTRACT AGAINST OCTAGON 

104. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in 

paragraphs 1-10 above as if fully set forth herein. 

105. Octagon and Facio entered into an agreement under which Facio 

would work as a Gold and Metals Specialist and be paid an annual salary of 

$120,000.00. 

106. The agreement always required some level of payment when Facio 

worked for Octagon. 

107. The agreement never allowed Octagon to completely deprive Facio of 

his salary. Further, the agreement required that Facio would be paid his salary 

bi-weekly. These are material terms. 

108. Contrary to the agreement, however, Octagon refused to pay Facio 

his salary starting on February 15, 2019 when it “temporarily” and unilaterally 

suspended bi-weekly payroll. See Exhibit B. 

109. Facio continued to work for Octagon until November 11, 2019 when 

Octagon terminated Facio’s employment. 

110. Octagon failed to tender any of Facio’s due and owing salary. 

111. The continued failures to pay Facio his salary, despite working for 

Octagon, was a material breach of the agreement. 

112. Facio was, and continues to be, undoubtedly damaged by Octagon’s 

breach of the agreement because Facio never received funds he was legally 

entitled to. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 16 of 27
17 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

WHEREFORE, Facio demands judgment in his favor and against Octagon 

for damages plus interest, attorney’s fees pursuant to Fla. Stat. §448.08, costs, 

and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. 

COUNT VIII 

UNJUST ENRICHMENT/CONTRACT IMPLIED IN LAW AGAINST OCTAGON 

(In the Alternative) 

113. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in 

paragraphs 1-10 above as if fully set forth herein. 

114. This Count is being asserted in the alternative and only to the extent 

Octagon denies the existence or enforceability of an express written contract 

between the parties as set forth in this Complaint. 

115. Facio performed services as a Golds and Metals Specialist for the 

benefit of Octagon during his employment with Octagon. 

116. In exchange for his services, Octagon agreed to pay Facio an annual 

salary of $120,000.00. 

117. Facio continued to work for Octagon because of this agreement. 

118. Octagon, however, failed to pay Facio, starting February 15, 2019, 

his biweekly salary and continued to withhold Facio’s salary through the end of 

his employment, November 11, 2019. 

119. While Octagon accepted Facio’s services and retained the benefits 

associated with same, Octagon did not pay Facio for hiw work. 

120. Octagon’s retention of all the value of Facio’s work without 

distribution of the agreed-upon salary is improper. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 17 of 27
18 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

121. Given Octagon’s misconduct and because it will receive a windfall 

by accepting and retaining the benefit conferred by Facio, the circumstances are 

such that it would be inequitable for Octagon to retain the benefit without paying 

fair value for it. 

122. Assuming Octagon denies the existence of an express agreement 

with Facio, as set forth in this Complaint, there is no adequate remedy at law 

with respect to compensation owed to Facio. 

WHEREFORE, Facio demands judgment in his favor and against Infinity 

for damages plus interest, attorney’s fees pursuant to Fla. Stat. §448.08, costs, 

and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. 

COUNT IX 

QUANTUM MERUIT/CONTRACT IMPLIED IN FACT AGAINST OCTAGON 

(In the Alternative) 

123. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations in 

paragraphs 1-10above as if fully set forth herein. 

124. This Count is being asserted in the alternative and only to the extent 

Octagon denies the existence or enforceability of an express written contract 

between the parties as set forth in this Complaint. 

125. Facio performed services as a Golds and Metals Specialist for the 

benefit of Octagon during his employment with Octagon. 

126. In exchange for his services, Octagon agreed to pay Facio an annual 

salary of $120,000.00. 

127. Facio continued to work for Octagon because of this agreement. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 18 of 27
19 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

128. Octagon, however, failed to pay Facio, starting February 15, 2019, 

his biweekly salary and continued to withhold Facio’s salary through the end of 

his employment, November 11, 2019. 

129. While Octagon accepted Facio’s services and retained the benefits 

associated with same, Octagon did not pay Facio for hiw work. 

130. Octagon’s retention of all the value of Facio’s work without 

distribution of the agreed-upon salary is improper. 

131. Given Octagon’s misconduct and because it will receive a windfall 

by accepting and retaining the benefit conferred by Facio, the circumstances are 

such that it would be inequitable for Octagon to retain the benefit without paying 

fair value for it. 

132. Octagon was fully aware that Facio expected to receive 

compensation for his work. 

133. Furthermore, the services performed by Facio were specifically 

required by Octagon. 

134. Octagon had full knowledge of the services and reaped the benefits 

of Facio’s labor. 

135. The course of conduct between the parties created a contract implied 

in fact under which Facio would be compensated for the valuable services he 

rendered in a specific manner. 

136. By denying Facio compensation due to him, Octagon has been 

unjustly enriched. 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 19 of 27
20 | P a g e 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

124101 Orange Drive· Suite 123 · Davie, FL 33330 

300 Sevilla Avenue · Suite 206 · Coral Gables, FL 33134 

(786) 485.5232 · www.PBA-Law.com 

137. Assuming Octagon denies the existence of an express Agreement 

with Facio, as set forth in this Complaint, there is no adequate remedy at law 

with respect to compensation owed to Facio. 

WHEREFORE, Facio demands judgment in its favor and against Octagon 

for damages plus interest, attorney’s fees pursuant to Fla. Stat. §448.08, costs, 

and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper. 

JURY TRIAL 

Plaintiff hereby request a trial by jury with respect to all claims so triable. 

Dated: May 13, 2020

Respectfully submitted, 

By: J. Freddy Perera

J. Freddy Perera, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 93625 

E-mail: freddy@pba-law.com 

Brody M. Shulman, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 092044 

E-mail: brody@pba-law.com 

PERERA BARNHART ALEMÁN 

12401 Orange Drive Suite 123 

Davie, FL 33330 

Telephone: (786) 485-5232 

Counsel for Plaintiff 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 20 of 27
EXHIBIT “A” 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 21 of 27
Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 22 of 27
Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 23 of 27
EXHIBIT “B” 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 24 of 27
Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 25 of 27
EXHIBIT “C” 

Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 26 of 27
Case 1:20-cv-22008-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/13/2020 Page 27 of 27