Muniz v. Primary Medical Staffing Inc.

• Court: District Court, S.D. Florida
• Decided: September 11, 2025
• Docket: 0:25-cv-61284
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION CASE NO. 25-61284-CIV-DIMITROULEAS/HUNT

INDIRA CLARITAS MUNIZ, Plaintiff, v. PRIMARY MEDICAL STAFFING INC., Defendant. __________________________________/ REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

THIS CAUSE is before this Court on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or Alternative to Stay and to Compel Arbitration. ECF No. 6. The Honorable William P. Dimitrouleas, United States District Judge, referred this Motion to the undersigned for appropriate disposition. ECF No. 7; see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); S.D. Fla. Mag. R. 1. Having carefully reviewed the Motion, the Response, and Reply thereto, the entire record, and applicable law, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, the undersigned respectfully RECOMMENDS that Defendant’s Motion be GRANTED IN PART for the reasons outlined below. This is a case brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) for alleged violations of the statutory wage and overtime provisions. See 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq. ECF No. 1. Defendant now seeks to compel arbitration based on a prior agreement between the parties. Defendant requests this court issue an order directing that such arbitration proceed and dismiss the case. As an initial matter, there is no dispute that this case should go to arbitration. Plaintiff in her response to the Motion states that she had no objection to arbitrating the matter. Instead, her only contention is that this case should be stayed rather than dismissed. Defendant in reply maintains that dismissal is the proper path forward.

Thus, the only issue remaining is whether the Court should stay or dismiss the suit. Defendant argues that dismissal is discretionary and appropriate, while Plaintiff insists the Court must issue a stay. “[T]he traditional rule is that a court may compel arbitration and either stay or dismiss the suit.” Kennedy v. VGW Holdings Ltd., No. 1:24-CV-2184- TWT, 2025 WL 1932750, at *5 (N.D. Ga. July 14, 2025) (citing Lambert v. Austin Indus., 544 F.3d 1192, 1195 (11th Cir. 2008)) (footnote omitted). “However, as the Supreme Court recently held, the FAA ‘compels the court to stay the proceeding’ if one of the parties requests a stay.” Id. (quoting Smith v. Spizzirri, 601 U.S. 472, 478 (2024)). As Plaintiff has requested a stay, and in light of recent precedent, the Court should honor that request. RECOMMENDATION Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or Alternative to Stay and to Compel Arbitration, ECF No. 6, be GRANTED IN PART. It should be granted to the extent that the Parties should be required to arbitrate Plaintiff's claim. The Case should be stayed pending the outcome of arbitration. Within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation, any party may serve and file written objections to any of the above findings and recommendations as provided by the Local Rules for this district. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); S.D. Fla. Mag. R. 4(b). The parties are hereby notified that a failure to timely object waives the right to challenge on appeal the District Court’s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions contained in this Report and Recommendation. 11th Cir. R. 3-1 (2018); see Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). DONE AND SUBMITTED at Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 11th day of September 2025.

BAe ba It PATRICKM.HUNT = = —— UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Copies furnished to: Honorable William P. Dimitrouleas All Counsel of Record