UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO: 

CARLOS FERNANDEZ, 

 

Plaintiff, 

 

v. 

CHECKALT ERAS, INC. and 

SHAI STERN, 

 Defendants. 

_______________________________________/ 

NOTICE OF REMOVAL 

 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1441, and 1446, Defendants CheckAlt ERAS, Inc. 

(“CheckAlt”) and Shai Stern (“Stern”) (collectively, “Defendants”), by and through their counsel, 

hereby give notice of the removal of this action to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of 

Florida, Miami Division. In support of this Notice of Removal, Defendants state as follows: 

1. On or about June 2, 2020, Plaintiff Carlos Fernandez (“Plaintiff”) filed a civil action 

against Defendants in the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade 

County, Florida, Case No. 2020-11724-CA-01, captioned Carlos Fernandez v. Check Alt Eras Inc. 

and Shai Stern (the “State Court Action”). A true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s Complaint, along 

with the rest of the State Court Action file, is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 

2. On June 15, 2020, Defendant CheckAlt’s registered agent accepted service of 

Plaintiff’s Summons and Complaint on its behalf. No other process, pleading, or order has been 

served on Defendants in this action. 

3. Defendants have not yet appeared, responded, or otherwise answered Plaintiff’s 

Complaint in the State Court Action. The time for answering the Complaint or otherwise pleading in 

Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 1 of 17
2 

the State Court Action has not yet expired. 

4. The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami 

Division, is the district court of the United States for the district and division embracing the place 

where the State Court Action is pending (Miami-Dade County, Florida). See 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). 

5. In the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants failed to pay overtime and/or 

regular compensation owed to Plaintiff in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (the 

“FLSA”), as amended, 29 U.S.C. Section 201, et seq. In connection with the same, Plaintiff alleges 

that Defendants unlawfully misclassified Plaintiff in violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair 

Trade Practices Act (“FDUTPA”), § 501.211 et seq., and willfully filed fraudulent information in 

violation of 26 U.S.C. Section 7434 of the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”). Specifically, Plaintiff’s 

Complaint filed in the State Court Action contains the following counts: 

a. Count I – FLSA Violation (Overtime and/or Regular Time Compensation) 

b. Count II – FDUTPA Violation (Misclassifying Plaintiff) 

c. Count III – Declaratory Relief (Misclassifying Plaintiff) 

d. Count IV – IRC Section 7434 Violation (Fraudulent Information Returns) 

e. Count V – Breach of Oral Contract (Overtime and/or Regular Time Compensation) 

See Exhibit 1. Defendants deny all of Plaintiff’s allegations. 

6. This Court has original jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s FLSA claim as it arises under 

federal law. See 29 U.S.C. § 216(b); see also 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1337(a). Section 216(b) of 

the FLSA provides that “[a]n action to recover the liability prescribed [earlier in the Act] may be 

maintained against any employer (including a public agency) in any Federal or State court of 

competent jurisdiction.” 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). 

7. Similarly, Plaintiff’s FLSA claim is subject to removal because it arises under 

federal law. See 29 U.S.C. § 216(b); see also 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1337(a). The Supreme Court 

has held that the concurrent jurisdiction provided by the FLSA does not bar a Florida employer’s 

Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 2 of 17
3 

decision to remove an action brought under the FLSA to a U.S. District Court. Breur v. Jim’s 

Concrete of Brevard, Inc., 538 U.S. 691 (2003); see also Hodge v. Dolgencorp, Inc., No. 2:05-

CV-235FTM29DNF, 2005 WL 1668535, at *1 (M.D. Fla. July 13, 2005) (holding that FLSA 

action filed in state court was properly removed to federal court on federal question basis). 

8. This Court also has original jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s Section 7434 claim as it 

arises under the federal tax laws and, as such, is subject to removal. See 28 U.S.C. § 1331. 

9. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a), as these claims arise from the same nucleus of operative facts as Plaintiff’s 

FLSA and Section 7434 claims such that they form part of the same case or controversy under 

Article III of the United States Constitution. For example, Plaintiff’s FDUTPA claim alleging his 

misclassification as an independent contractor arises from the same facts and would involve the 

same witnesses and/or evidence as his FLSA claim seeking overtime wages and Section 7434 

claim. See, e.g., Hudson v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., 90 F.3d 451, 455 (11th Cir. 1996) (A state claim 

forms part of the same case or controversy if it “arise[s] from the same facts, or involve[s] similar 

occurrences, witnesses or evidence” as the federal claim over which the district court has original 

jurisdiction). 

10. The interests of judicial economy and efficiency will be best served by this Court’s 

exercise of supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims. 

11. This Notice of Removal is timely filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(b), having 

been filed within thirty (30) days of the first notice of the Summons and Complaint upon 

Defendants. 

Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 3 of 17
4 

12. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), Defendants shall promptly serve written notice of 

filing of this Notice of Removal on Plaintiff and shall file a copy of the same with the Circuit Court 

of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida. 

13. If any question arises to the propriety of the removal of this action, Defendants request 

the opportunity to brief any disputed issues and present oral argument in support of their position that 

the case is properly removable. Defendants further reserve the right to supplement this Notice of 

Removal and present additional arguments in support of their right to Removal. 

14. Nothing in this Notice of Removal shall be interpreted as a waiver or 

relinquishment of Defendants’ right to assert any defense, counterclaims, motions, or other matter, 

including without limitation, the defenses of (1) lack of jurisdiction; (2) insufficiency of process; 

(3) insufficiency of service of process; (4) failure to state a claim; or (5) any other procedural or 

substantive defense available under state or federal law. Further, no admission of fact, law, or 

liability is intended by this Notice of Removal. 

WHEREFORE, Defendants CheckAlt ERAS, Inc. and Shai Stern hereby request that this 

case be removed to this Court pursuant to the laws of the United States. 

Dated: July 2, 2020 Respectfully Submitted, 

By: /s/ Laurie A. Perez 

 

Laurie A. Perez 

 Florida Bar No. 1009138 

 lperez@howardandhoward.com 

Howard & Howard Attorneys PLLC 

200 S. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1100 

Chicago, Illinois 60604 

Tel: (312) 372-4000 

Fax: (312) 939-5617 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 4 of 17
5 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on July 2, 2020, I electronically filed the foregoing document 

with the Clerk of the Court using CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being 

served this day on all counsel of record identified on the below Service List, either via transmission 

of Notice of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for those 

counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive Notices of Filing electronically. 

By: /s/ Laurie A. Perez 

 Laurie A. Perez 

Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 5 of 17
6 

SERVICE LIST 

Scott M. Behren 

Florida Bar No. 9877986 

scott@behrenlaw.com 

Behren Law Firm 

1930 N. Commerce Parkway – Suite 4 

Weston, FL 33326 

Tel: (954) 636-3802 

Fax: (772) 252-3365 

Attorney for Plaintiff

Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 6 of 17
EXHIBIT 1 

 

Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 7 of 17
Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 8 of 17
Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 9 of 17
Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 10 of 17
Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 11 of 17
Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 12 of 17
Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 13 of 17
Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 14 of 17
Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 15 of 17
Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 16 of 17
Case 1:20-cv-22746-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/02/2020 Page 17 of 17