UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO._________________

JOSUE GUILLAUME,

Plaintiff,

vs.

AVENTURA KOSHER KINGDOM, INC., 

d/b/a KOSHER KINGDOM MIAMI,

a Florida corporation, and PHILLIP

EINHORN, individually,

Defendants.

________________________________________/

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, JOSUE GUILLAUME, by and through undersigned counsel, sues the Defendants, 

AVENTURA KOSHER KINGDOM, INC. d/b/a KOSHER KINGDOM MIAMI, (hereinafter, 

“Company”), and PHILLIP EINHORN, individually, (hereinafter, collectively referred to as 

“Defendants”) and alleges as follows:

1. Plaintiff, a former employee of the Defendants, brings this action to recover 

compensation and other relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended (the "FLSA"), 29 

U.S.C. § 201 et seq. 

2. Jurisdiction is conferred on this Court by 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).

3. The unlawful employment practices alleged herein occurred and/or were committed 

within this judicial district. 

4. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff is/was a resident of this judicial district, an 

employee of the Defendants, sui juris and otherwise within the jurisdiction of this Court.

Case 1:22-cv-24125-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/20/2022 Page 1 of 4
2

5. At all times material hereto, Defendant, Company, was the employer or former 

employer of the Plaintiff and is conducting business in this judicial district and is otherwise an 

‘employer’ under the FLSA.

6. That at all times material hereto, Defendant, PHILLIP EINHORN, individually, acted 

directly in the interests of his employer, the Defendant, Company, in relation to the Plaintiff, and this 

individual Defendant exercised the requisite legal control and otherwise administered the illegal acts 

as described herein on behalf of the Defendant, Company, and is otherwise an ‘employer’ under the 

FLSA.

7. At all times material hereto, Defendants were and continue to be an ‘enterprise 

engaged in commerce’ within the meaning of the FLSA. 

8. That at all times material hereto, Plaintiff was ‘engaged in commerce’ within the 

meaning of the FLSA.

9. Defendants have been at all times material engaged in interstate commerce, and

Defendants’ annual gross revenues derived from this interstate commerce, upon information and 

belief, are in excess of $500,000.00 for the relevant time period.1

1 A Plaintiff “need not know for certain, nor prove, that [defendant] has annual gross revenues 

exceeding $500,000 at the pleading stage, especially since that information is likely in Defendants' 

hands, not his.” Ceant v. Aventura Limousine, Inc., 874 F. Supp. 2d 1373, 1378–79 (S.D. Fla. 

2012); see Daniel v. Pizza Zone, Inc., 2008 WL 793660, at *2 (M.D.Fla. 2008) (“bare bones 

allegations” of gross sales are acceptable; requiring more would only encourage “gross speculation” 

from the plaintiff and would “not provide the defendant with meaningful information because the 

defendant already has [ ] such information”) (citation omitted). Pleading that a defendant's “gross 

annual revenues meet this threshold on ‘information and belief,’...is enough.” Id.; Dobbins v. 

Scriptfleet, Inc., 2012 WL 601145, at *2 (M.D.Fla. 2012) (allegation, on information and belief, that 

defendants' annual gross sales exceeded $500,000 was sufficient to withstand dismissal);

Roberts, 2010 WL 114001, at *3 (allegation that plaintiff “was of the belief that [defendant] grossed 

in excess of $500,000 annually” was sufficient to withstand dismissal); cf. Vierra v. Sage Dining 

Servs., Inc., 2010 WL 4867557, at *3 (M.D.Fla. 2010) (“[Plaintiff] failed to allege that it is her belief 

that [defendant] grossed an annual volume of at least $500,000.”).

Case 1:22-cv-24125-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/20/2022 Page 2 of 4
3

10. The Plaintiff was hired as a non-exempt employee by the Defendants from February

of 2007 through January 19, 2020 as a cook, and was being paid $10.00 per hour.

11. During his employment, the Defendants however had Plaintiff, a non-exempt 

employee under the FLSA, work in excess of forty (40) hours per work week, but willfully refused 

to properly compensate Plaintiff for such work in violation of the FLSA.

12. All records concerning the number of hours actually worked by Plaintiff are 

presumably in the exclusive possession and sole custody and control of the Defendants, and 

therefore, Plaintiff is unable to state at this time the exact amount due. 

13. Plaintiff, however, will exert diligent efforts to obtain such information by 

appropriate discovery proceedings, to be taken promptly in this case, and if required, an amendment 

to this Complaint will be submitted to set forth an amount due by the Plaintiff.

COUNT I

FLSA - COMPANY

Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 13

above.

 14. Plaintiff is entitled to time and one half for each hour worked in excess of forty (40) 

hours per work week pursuant to the FLSA.

15. By reason of the intentional, willful and unlawful acts of the Defendant, Company in 

violation of the FLSA, Plaintiff has suffered damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendant, Company for all 

damages and relief under the FLSA, including liquidated damages (and/or pre-judgment interest), 

attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses, in addition to all other relief this Court deems just and proper.

Case 1:22-cv-24125-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/20/2022 Page 3 of 4
4

COUNT II

FLSA–PHILLIP EINHORN

Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 13 of 

this Complaint.

 16. Plaintiff is entitled to time and one half for each hour worked in excess of forty (40) 

hours per work week pursuant to the FLSA.

17. By reason of the intentional, willful and unlawful acts of the Defendant, PHILLIP

EINHORN in violation of the FLSA, Plaintiff has suffered damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendant, PHILLIP EINHORN

for all damages and relief under the FLSA, including liquidated damages (and/or pre-judgment 

interest), attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses, in addition to all other relief this Court deems just and 

proper.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all counts. 

Dated: December 20, 2022 Respectfully submitted,

Law Offices of Levy & Levy, P.A.

1000 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway, Suite 588

Sunrise, Florida 33323

Telephone: (954) 763-5722

Facsimile: (954) 763-5723

Email: chad@levylevylaw.com

Service Email: assistant@levylevylaw.com

Counsel for Plaintiff

/s/ Chad Levy 

CHAD E. LEVY, ESQ.

F.B.N.: 0851701

Case 1:22-cv-24125-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/20/2022 Page 4 of 4