Page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 

IRAN SAEZ

 Plaintiff,

vs.

LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS, INC., 

a Florida for Profit Corporation, and 

MANUEL LOPEZ, individually. 

 Defendants.

________________________________________/

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff IRAN SAEZ (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) by and through his undersigned attorney, 

hereby sues Defendants LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS, INC., a Florida for Profit Corporation

(hereinafter "LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS”) and MANUEL LOPEZ, individually (hereinafter 

“LOPEZ”) (collectively “Defendants”) and states as follows:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. This is an action for damages and other relief for unpaid overtime committed by Defendants 

pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et seq. (hereinafter the “Fair 

Labor Standards Act”, the “FLSA” or the “Act”).

2. Jurisdiction is conferred upon this Court pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), 28 U.S.C. § 1331, 

and 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

3. Venue is proper for the United States Court for the Southern District of Florida because 

Plaintiff was employed in the Southern District of Florida by Defendants, which at all material 

times conducted, and continues to conduct, business in the Southern District of Florida, and 

Case 1:22-cv-23485-JAL Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/25/2022 Page 1 of 8
Page 2

because the acts that give rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred within the Southern District of 

Florida and because Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction there.

4. Plaintiff at all times pertinent to this complaint resided within the Southern District of Florida. 

Plaintiff is over the age of eighteen and otherwise sui juris. 

PARTIES

5. During all times relevant to this Complaint, Plaintiff was employed by Defendants. 

Specifically, Plaintiff performed work for Defendants from 2014 until June 6, 2022. Plaintiff 

was therefore an employee as defined by 29 U.S.C. § 203(e).

6. LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS is a Florida for Profit Corporation organized and existing under 

and by virtue of the laws of Florida and was registered to do business within Florida. LOMAN 

DISTRIBUTORS has its principal place of business in Miami, Florida. LOMAN 

DISTRIBUTORS had, at all times material hereto, conducted substantial and continuous 

business within the Southern District of Florida, and is subject to the laws of the United States 

and the State of Florida.

7. LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS is an “employer” as defined by 29 U.S.C. § 203(d) and (s)(1), in 

that it has employees engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce or 

that has employees handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods or materials that have 

been moved in or produced for commerce by any person.

8. Specifically, LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS is a company that develops and distributes, all kind 

of fabrics, materials and components for the window decoration and covering industry. From 

its headquarters in Miami (USA), LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS serves customers in North, 

South and Central America.

Case 1:22-cv-23485-JAL Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/25/2022 Page 2 of 8
Page 3

9. At all times material to this Complaint, LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS has had two (2) or more 

employees who have regularly sold, handled, or otherwise worked on goods and/or material 

that have been moved in or produced for commerce as fabrics, materials, and components for 

window decoration. 

10. LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS upon knowledge and belief, has had gross revenue which exceeds 

$500,000 for each of the past three (3) years and utilizes goods in the flow of commerce across 

state lines.

11. Defendant MANUEL LOPEZ, is an owner and exercised operational control over the 

activities of, corporate Defendant, LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS.

12. Defendant MANUEL LOPEZ, acted directly in the interest of his company, LOMAN 

DISTRIBUTORS. Upon all available information, MANUEL LOPEZ, controlled the manner 

in which Plaintiff performed his work, and the pay he was to receive. 

13. All Defendants were “employers” of Plaintiff as the term is defined under 29 U.S.C. § 203(d). 

14. All other conditions precedent to this action have been performed or have been waived. 

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS

15. Plaintiff is a non-exempt employee of Defendants and is subject to the payroll practices and 

procedures set forth hereinafter, and who worked more than forty (40) hours during one of 

more workweeks within three (3) years of the filing of this complaint.

16. Plaintiff began working for Defendants in 2014 as a warehouse operator. Plaintiff quit his job 

on or about June 6, 2022.During his employment, Plaintiff’s primary duties were performing 

manual labor. 

Case 1:22-cv-23485-JAL Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/25/2022 Page 3 of 8
Page 4

17. At all times pertinent to this action, Defendants failed to comply with 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 – 219 in 

that Plaintiff performed services for Defendants for which no provision was made to properly pay 

for those hours worked over forty (40) in a given workweek. 

18. Based on the information currently available to Plaintiff, YOUNG was paid $17.00/hour 40 hours 

a week. He was paid every week. 

19. When Plaintiff began working for Defendants, there was an understanding between Defendants 

and Plaintiff that he was to work Monday through Friday 8:30 AM – 5:00 PM with a 1⁄2 hour lunch 

break. 

20. Notwithstanding their agreement, Plaintiff regularly worked through lunch and would often work 

longer hours than the hours scheduled. Furthermore, Plaintiff would work on Saturdays on 

occasion.

21. A review of the pay stubs in which Plaintiff has in his current possession, custody, and control 

reflect that Plaintiff was issued a company check claiming to compensate him at his regular 

rate for 40 hours in a particular pay period regardless of the hours Plaintiff actually worked.

22. Defendants and their representatives knew that Plaintiff was working overtime, and that federal 

law requires employees to be compensated at time and one-half per hour for overtime pay.

23. Defendants maintained complete control over the hours Plaintiff worked and the pay he was 

to receive. 

24. Plaintiff has retained the undersigned firm to prosecute this action on his behalf and has agreed 

to pay it a reasonable fee for its services.

25. Plaintiff is entitled to his reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs if he is the prevailing party in 

this action.

Case 1:22-cv-23485-JAL Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/25/2022 Page 4 of 8
Page 5

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF FLSA/OVERTIME against LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS

26. Plaintiff, re-alleges and reaffirms paragraphs 1 through 25 as if fully set forth herein.

27. This action is brought by Plaintiff to recover from Defendant LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS

unpaid overtime compensation, as well as an additional amount as liquidated damages, costs, 

and reasonable attorney’s fees under the provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., 29 U.S.C. § 207 

(a)(1) states “[n]o employer shall employ any of his employees... for a work week longer than 

40 hours unless such employee receives compensation for his employment in excess of the 

hours above-specified at a rate not less than one and a half times the regular rate at which he 

is employed.”

28. Since the commencement of Plaintiff’s employment LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS has willfully 

violated the provisions of § 7 of the FLSA [29 U.S.C. § 207] by having employees working 

for longer than forty (40) hours without properly compensating them for all hours overtime

hours at a rate not less than one- and one-half times their regular rate.

29. Specifically, throughout his employment Plaintiff worked over forty (40) hours during some 

of the workweeks in which he was employed. 

30. LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS is and was, during all times hereafter mentioned, an enterprise 

engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce as defined in §§ 3 (r) and 

3(s) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(r) and 203(s). LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS’s business 

activities involve those to which the Fair Labor Standards Act applies. 

31. Specifically, LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS is a Florida Corporation that develops and distributes, 

in interstate commerce, fabrics, materials, and components for window decoration. 

32. Plaintiff was not exempted from the overtime provision of the Act pursuant to the provisions 

of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 213(a), in that he was neither a bona fide executive, administrative, or 

Case 1:22-cv-23485-JAL Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/25/2022 Page 5 of 8
Page 6

professional employee. Plaintiff performed manual labor, as such processing, organizing, 

packing, loading, and unloading goods at the warehouse and did not have decision-making 

authority.

33. LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS has knowingly and willfully failed to pay Plaintiff at time and one 

half of his regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) per week between 

the relevant time period.

34. By reason of the said intentional, willful, and unlawful acts of LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS, 

Plaintiff has suffered damages plus incurring costs and reasonable attorneys' fees.

35. Plaintiff seeks to recover for unpaid wages accumulated within three (3) years of the filing of 

this complaint.

36. As a result of LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS’ willful violations of the Act, Plaintiff is entitled to 

liquidated damages.

37. Plaintiff has retained the undersigned counsel to represent he in this action, and pursuant to 

29 U.S.C. § 216(b), Plaintiff is entitled to recover all reasonable attorneys' fees and costs 

incurred in this action from LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays for the following relief against LOMAN 

DISTRIBUTORS:

A. Adjudge and decree that Defendant has violated the FLSA and has done so willfully, 

intentionally and with reckless disregard for Plaintiff’s rights;

B. Award Plaintiff actual damages in the amount shown to be due for overtime 

compensation for hours worked in excess of forty (40) weekly, with interest; and

C. Award Plaintiff an equal amount in double damages/liquidated damages; and

D. Award Plaintiff the costs of this action, together with a reasonable attorneys' fees; and

Case 1:22-cv-23485-JAL Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/25/2022 Page 6 of 8
Page 7

E. Grant Plaintiff such additional relief as the Court deems just and proper under the 

circumstances.

COUNT II

VIOLATION OF FLSA/OVERTIME against LOPEZ

38. Plaintiff, re-alleges and reaffirms paragraphs 1 through 25 as if fully set forth herein.

39. At the times mentioned, Defendant LOPEZ was, and is now, a corporate officer of corporate 

Defendant, LOMAN DISTRIBUTORS.

40. LOPEZ was an employer of Plaintiff within the meaning of Section 3(d) of the Fair Labor 

Standards Act [29 U.S.C. § 203(d)], in that LOPEZ acted directly in the interests of LOMAN 

DISTRIBUTORS in relation to its employees including Plaintiff. 

41. Specifically, LOPEZ is the company’s owner and supervised Plaintiff, determined company 

payroll decisions, and maintained the right to hire and fire Plaintiff during all pertinent times

hereto.

42. LOPEZ had operational control of the business and is thus jointly liable for Plaintiff’s 

damages.

43. Defendant LOPEZ willfully and intentionally refused to properly pay Plaintiff overtime wages 

as required by the law of the United States as set forth above and remains owing Plaintiff these 

wages since the commencement of Plaintiff’s employment with Defendants as set forth above. 

44. By reason of the said intentional, willful and unlawful acts of LOPEZ, Plaintiff has suffered 

damages plus incurring costs and reasonable attorneys' fees.

45. As a result of LOPEZ willful violations of the Act, Plaintiff is entitled to liquidated damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays for the following relief against Defendant LOPEZ: 

A. Adjudge and decree that LOPEZ has violated the FLSA and has done so willfully, 

intentionally and with reckless disregard for Plaintiff’s rights;

Case 1:22-cv-23485-JAL Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/25/2022 Page 7 of 8
Page 8

B. Award Plaintiff actual damages in the amount shown to be due for unpaid overtime 

compensation for hours worked in excess of forty (40) weekly, with interest; and

C. Award Plaintiff an equal amount in double damages/liquidated damages; and

D. Award Plaintiff the costs of this action, together with a reasonable attorneys' fees; and

E. Grant Plaintiff such additional relief as the Court deems just and proper under the 

circumstances.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff, IRAN SAEZ demands trial by jury on all issues and all counts of this Complaint so triable 

as a matter of right.

Dated: October 25, 2022

By: /s/ Nathaly Saavedra

Nathaly Saavedra, Esq. 

Fla. Bar No. 118315

Email: nathaly@peregonza.com

By: /s/ Jocelyn R. Rocha

Jocelyn R. Rocha, Esq. 

Fla. Bar No. 1039302

Email: jocelyn@peregonza.com

 

 By: /s/ Juan J. Perez

 Juan J. Perez, Esq. 

Fla. Bar No. 115784

Email: juan@peregonza.com 

PEREGONZA THE ATTORNEYS, PLLC

5201 Blue Lagoon Drive, 

Suite 290

Miami, FL 33126

Tel. (786) 650-0202

Fax. (786) 650-0200

Case 1:22-cv-23485-JAL Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/25/2022 Page 8 of 8