Alonso Alexander Guardado Lopez v. Air Pro Heating & Cooling LLC, et al.

Lopez · United States District Court for the District of Arizona · March 26, 2026 · No. CV-25-02009-PHX-SMM (JZB)

Summary

This Report and Recommendation addresses Plaintiff Alonso Alexander Guardado Lopez’s renewed motion for attorneys’ fees and costs following entry of default judgment in an action involving the Fair Labor Standards Act and Arizona minimum wage law. The magistrate judge recommends awarding $5,651.50 in attorneys’ fees and $577.80 in out-of-pocket costs, with modifications based on the reasonableness of billed time and the hourly rate.

Holdings

  1. A plaintiff who obtained default judgment is a prevailing party and is entitled to seek reasonable attorneys' fees and costs under the FLSA and Arizona minimum-wage law.
  2. The reasonable attorneys' fee award should be reduced to $5,651.50 based on 12.7 compensable hours at a reasonable hourly rate of $445.
  3. Plaintiff should receive $577.80 in out-of-pocket costs.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether plaintiff was entitled to recover attorneys' fees and costs under the FLSA and Arizona minimum-wage law after obtaining default judgment.
  2. What amount of attorneys' fees was reasonable under the lodestar method and the Kerr factors.
  3. Whether plaintiff was entitled to recover the requested $577.80 in out-of-pocket costs under the applicable rules.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (26)

  • G&G Closed Cir. Events LLC v. Carbajal, No. CV-20-00838-PHX-SPL, 2020 WL 6699485, at *1 (D. Ariz. Nov. 13, 2020)(followed)
  • Puente Arizona v. Penzone, No. CV-14-01356-PHX-DGC, 2017 WL 4805116, at *1 (D. Ariz. Oct. 25, 2017)(followed)
  • Roberts v. City of Honolulu, 938 F.3d 1020, 1023 (9th Cir. 2019)(followed)
  • Kelly v. Wengler, 822 F.3d 1085, 1099 (9th Cir. 2016)(followed)
  • Machowski v. 333 N. Placentia Prop., LLC, 38 F.4th 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2022)(followed)
  • Chalmers v. City of Los Angeles, 796 F.2d 1205, 1210-11 (9th Cir. 1986), opinion amended on denial of reh'g, 808 F.2d 1373 (9th Cir. 1987)(followed)
  • Blum v. Stenson, 465 U.S. 886, 896 n.11 (1984)(followed)
  • In re Nucorp Energy, Inc., 764 F.2d 655, 659-60 (9th Cir. 1985)(followed)
  • Gary v. Carbon Cycle Ariz. LLC, 398 F. Supp. 3d 468, 479, 487 (D. Ariz. 2019)(followed)
  • Intel Corp. v. Terabyte Int'l, Inc., 6 F.3d 614, 622 (9th Cir. 1993)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 26.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…