Page 1 of 4

Diby Ako v. Arriva Best Security, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (N.D. Tex.) Case No. 3:22-cv-1751-S

Motion for Limited Discovery

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

DIBY AKO PLAINTIFF

vs. No. 3:22-cv-1751-S

ARRIVA BEST SECURITY, INC., DEFENDANTS

and AMOIFO KOFFI

MOTION FOR LIMITED DISCOVERY

Plaintiff Diby Ako (“Plaintiff”) by and through his attorney Josh Sanford of Sanford 

Law Firm, PLLC, for his Motion for Limited Discovery, states and alleges as follows:

1. Plaintiff filed his Original Complaint against Defendants Arriva Best 

Security, Inc., and Amoifo Koffi on August 11, 2022. ECF No. 1.

2. Plaintiff served Defendant Amoifo Koffi on September 24, 2022, and 

Defendant Arriva Best Security, Inc. on March 18, 2023. ECF Nos. 7, 19.

3. The deadline to file an Answer or other responsive pleading has passed 

with neither Defendant filing any response pleading or otherwise entering an appearance 

in this case.

4. This Court entered Clerk’s Entry of Default against Defendant Koffi on 

February 22, 2022 (ECF No. 16) and against Defendant Arriva Best Security, Inc., on 

August 30, 2023 (ECF No. 27). Plaintiff has moved for default against Defendants twice 

in this case. ECF Nos. 28, 35. 

Case 3:22-cv-01751-S Document 41 Filed 12/02/24 Page 1 of 4 PageID 229
Page 2 of 4

Diby Ako v. Arriva Best Security, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (N.D. Tex.) Case No. 3:22-cv-1751-S

Motion for Limited Discovery

5. The Court denied Plaintiff’s first Motion for Default because Plaintiff failed 

to adequately demonstrate that Defendant Koffi was not in active military service, or a 

minor or incompetent person. ECF No. 32. 

6. Plaintiff cured this defect in his second Motion for Default, but the Court 

denied the second Motion because Plaintiff failed to adequately plead FLSA coverage 

against Defendants.

7. Plaintiff’s duties for Defendants were limited to Defendants’ fire watching 

services, and therefore Plaintiff does not have first-hand or personal knowledge of the 

facts needed to adequately allege FLSA coverage. However, Plaintiff has a good faith, 

reasonable basis for believing that Defendants meet the criteria for both individual and 

enterprise coverage. 

8. Defendants are a Texas company that advertises itself as a “Nationwide” 

security services business. In addition to fire watching services, Defendants provide 

security services for large-scale industries and events such as construction sites, athletic 

events, hospitals, universities, and retail establishments across the United States. See

https://www.arrivabestsecurity.net/services.html (last visited Dec. 2, 2024). 

9. Based on Defendants’ advertising, Plaintiff believes that Defendants 

conduct business that “is so directly and vitally related to the functioning of an 

instrumentality or facility of interstate commerce as to be, in practical effect, a part of it, 

rather than isolated local activity” by employing security officers who protect persons or 

goods that travel in interstate commerce. Mendoza v. Detail Sols., LLC, 911 F. Supp. 2d 

433, 439 (N.D. Tex. 2012).

Case 3:22-cv-01751-S Document 41 Filed 12/02/24 Page 2 of 4 PageID 230
Page 3 of 4

Diby Ako v. Arriva Best Security, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (N.D. Tex.) Case No. 3:22-cv-1751-S

Motion for Limited Discovery

10. Moreover, given the breadth and extent of the services Defendants provide, 

Plaintiff believes that Defendants have an annual gross volume of sales made or business 

done of more than $500,000.00. Blundell v. Lassiter, No. 3:17-cv-1990-L-BN, 2018 WL 

6738046, at *5 (N.D. Tex. May 21, 2018).

11. All evidence necessary to prove this coverage is in Defendants’ possession. 

Plaintiff respectfully requests permission to serve discovery on Defendants limited to the 

issue of FLSA coverage. The discovery that Plaintiff requests permission to serve is

attached to this Motion as Exhibit 1. 

WHEREFORE, premises considered, Plaintiff Diby Ako respectfully requests that

his Motion for Limited Discovery be granted and the Court award such other and further 

relief as may be appropriate and just.

Respectfully submitted,

PLAINTIFF DIBY AKO

SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC

Kirkpatrick Plaza

10800 Financial Centre Pkwy, Suite 510

Little Rock, Arkansas 72211

Telephone: (501) 221-0088

Facsimile: (888) 787-2040

/s/ Josh Sanford

Josh Sanford

Tex. Bar No. 24077858

josh@sanfordlawfirm.com

Case 3:22-cv-01751-S Document 41 Filed 12/02/24 Page 3 of 4 PageID 231
Page 4 of 4

Diby Ako v. Arriva Best Security, Inc., et al.

U.S.D.C. (N.D. Tex.) Case No. 3:22-cv-1751-S

Motion for Limited Discovery

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned counsel, do hereby certify that on the date imprinted by the 

CM/ECF system, a copy of the foregoing MOTION was filed via the CM/ECF system, 

which will provide notice to all interested parties. Notice has been delivered by other 

means to:

Arriva Best Security Inc.

c/o Aimee Koffee

5482 Wilshire Blvd. Ste. 219

Los Angeles, CA 90036

Amoifo Koffee

9955 Durant Drive, Unit 304

Beverley Hills, CA 90212-1601

Arriva Best Security Inc.

2435 N. Central Express Way, 12th Floor

Richardson, Texas 75080

/s/ Josh Sanford

 Josh Sanford

Case 3:22-cv-01751-S Document 41 Filed 12/02/24 Page 4 of 4 PageID 232