UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION 

www.flsb.uscourts.gov

In re: Chapter 11 Cases 

LIBERTY POWER HOLDINGS, LLC, Case No. 21-13797-SMG 

LPT, LLC, Case No. 21-15537-SMG 

LIBERTY POWER MARYLAND, LLC, Case No. 21-15539-SMG 

LIBERTY POWER DISTRICT OF Case No. 21-15540-SMG 

COLUMBIA, LLC, 

 (Jointly administered 21-13797-SMG) 

/ 

OBJECTION TO PROOF OF CLAIM FILED BY JASON MENDOZA 

ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND FORMER 

EMPLOYEES OF THE DEBTOR FOR WARN ACT AND OTHER DAMAGES 

(Proof of Claim No. 4 in Case No. 21-13797) 

LIBERTY POWER HOLDINGS, LLC (“Holdings” or “Debtor”), one of the four abovecaptioned debtors in these chapter 11 cases, by and through its undersigned counsel, and pursuant 

to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3007 and Local Rule 3007-1, files this objection (“Objection”) to Proof of 

Claim No. 4 filed in Case No. 21-13797 by Jason Mendoza (“Claimant”) of behalf of himself and 

the class he seeks to represent consisting of all former employees of the Debtor who worked at or 

reported to Debtor’s facility located at 2100 W. Cypress Creek Road, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 

33309 (collectively, the “Purported Class”) asserting a priority wage claim against Holdings in the 

amount of $1,000,000. In support of the Objection the Debtor states as follows: 

1. On May 12, 2021, Claimant filed Proof of Claim No. 4 in Case No. 21-13797

asserting a priority wage claim against Holdings in the amount of $1,000,000 (the “Priority Wage 

Claim”). The Priority Wage Claim is based on the Debtor’s alleged violations of the Worker 

Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 2101 et seq. (the “WARN Act”).

2. The Priority Wage Claim states that:

Case 21-13797-SMG Doc 903 Filed 05/25/23 Page 1 of 3
2

a. The Debtor was an “employer” as that term is defined in 29 U.S.C. § 

2101(a)(1) and 20 C.F.R. § 639(a) and therefore the WARN Act applies to 

the Debtor;

b. The Debtor and Liberty Power Corporation (“LPC”), Holdings’ ultimate 

parent company, are a “single employer”; and

c. The Debtor and Liberty Power Corporation as “alter egos” of each other.

3. The Debtor objects to the Priority Wage Claim on the basis that:

a. LPC was, at all relevant times, the employer of Claimant and each member 

of the Purported Class and therefore the Debtor is not an employer under 

the WARN Act; and

b. Even if this Court were to find that the Debtor and LPC are a “single 

employer” or “alter egos” of each other, LPC only had 94 full-time 

employees and 1 part-time employee as of April 18, 2021 (the alleged 

termination date) which is below the statutory minimum threshold of the 

WARN Act.

4. The WARN Act states: 

The term “employer” means any business that employs 100 or more 

employees, excluding part-time employees; or 100 or more employees, 

including part-time employees, who in the aggregate work at least 4,000 hours 

per week, exclusive of hours of overtime. 

5. The Debtor seeks an Order of this Court striking and disallowing the Priority Wage 

Claim on the threshold grounds that, even if this Court were to impute LPC’s employer status1

 to 

the Debtor, the Debtor could not be an employer under the WARN Act as Claimant cannot meet 

1

 It is important to note that LPC is also not an “employer” under the WARN Act because Claimant cannot meet the 

“minimum number of employees” threshold. 

Case 21-13797-SMG Doc 903 Filed 05/25/23 Page 2 of 3
3

its burden that the WARN Act applies to the Debtor. A list of LPC’s 95 employees as of April 18, 

2021 will be given to opposing counsel confidentially and filed with the Court under seal. 

6. The Debtor reserves all rights to amend or supplement this Objection on any 

grounds, including but not limited to, that: (i) LPC was the employer for Claimant and the 

Purported Class; (ii) the Debtor and LPC are not a “single employer”; (iii) the Debtor and LPC are 

not alter egos of each other; (iv) the Priority Wage Claim purports to be a “Class Proof of Claim” 

and, as no motion to certify the Purported Class has been filed, much less ruled upon, the request 

is premature; and (v) because the Priority Wage Claim cannot be a class proof of claim, the Priority 

Wage Claim exceeds the allowable priority wage claim of $13,650 applicable to Claimant himself. 

WHEREFORE, the Debtor respectfully requests that this Court enter an Order: (i) 

sustaining the Objection; (ii) striking and disallowing the Priority Wage Claim; and (iii) granting 

the Debtor such other and further relief as is just and proper. 

Dated this 25th day of May, 2023. 

Respectfully Submitted, 

 VENABLE, LLP 

Counsel for Debtors-in-Possession 

 100 Southeast Second Street, Suite 4400 

 Miami, Florida 33131 

 Telephone: (305) 349-2300 

 Facsimile: (305) 349-2310 

 By: /s/ Heather L. Harmon 

 Paul J. Battista, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 884162 

pjbattista@venable.com

Mariaelena Gayo-Guitian, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 813818 

mguitian@venable.com

Heather L. Harmon, Esq. 

Florida Bar No. 13192 

hlharmon@venable.com

Case 21-13797-SMG Doc 903 Filed 05/25/23 Page 3 of 3