NEWARK, N.J. — A federal judge has denied, without prejudice, a motion for default judgment filed by a former Jersey City restaurant employee who alleges he and other workers were underpaid and denied overtime wages while employed at Bricklane Jersey City.
In an opinion issued Thursday, U.S. District Judge Jamel K. Semper ruled that plaintiff Alex Acevedo’s request for a default judgment against Bricklane Jersey City LLC and defendants Satinder Sharma and Ajit Bains could not proceed because the damages evidence submitted to the court contained inconsistencies that must first be addressed.
According to the lawsuit, Acevedo worked as a dishwasher and porter at Bricklane, located at 136 Newark Avenue in downtown Jersey City, from approximately December 2023 through January 2025. He alleges he regularly worked six days a week from 10:30 a.m. until 8:30 p.m., totaling about 60 hours each week.
Acevedo claims he was paid a flat weekly salary of $600 and was never compensated for approximately 20 hours of overtime each week. The lawsuit alleges the pay violated both the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law because it fell below the applicable minimum wage and failed to include overtime compensation.
Judge cites conflicting wage claims
Although the defendants did not respond to the lawsuit, Judge Semper found that Acevedo’s filings presented conflicting information regarding his pay.
The complaint alleges he was compensated at approximately $10 per hour, while a later court filing asserted he earned $15 per hour. Because those figures directly affect any calculation of unpaid wages and overtime, the court ruled that damages cannot be determined without additional evidence.
The judge denied the motion without prejudice, allowing Acevedo to renew his request after submitting documentation supporting his damages calculations or after a hearing is held.
- Former employee alleges he worked about 60 hours per week.
- Lawsuit claims Bricklane paid a flat $600 weekly salary.
- Plaintiff alleges he received no overtime compensation.
- Federal judge denied default judgment without prejudice.
- Court cited inconsistent statements regarding the plaintiff’s hourly wage.
The case highlights that even when defendants fail to appear in court, federal judges must independently verify that plaintiffs have established both liability and a legally supported calculation of damages before entering a default judgment. Wage theft claims under federal and New Jersey law frequently require payroll records, affidavits or other evidence to support damage awards.
FAQ
Who filed the lawsuit?
Former Bricklane employee Alex Acevedo filed the lawsuit individually and on behalf of similarly situated workers.
What does the lawsuit allege?
The complaint alleges violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New Jersey Wage and Hour Law for unpaid minimum wages and overtime.
Did the restaurant respond?
According to the court, the defendants did not oppose the motion for default judgment.
Why did the judge deny the motion?
The court found inconsistencies in the plaintiff’s filings regarding how much he was paid, making it impossible to accurately calculate damages.
Can the plaintiff try again?
Yes. The denial was without prejudice, meaning the plaintiff may renew the request after providing additional evidence supporting the damages sought.
Sources: U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, Acevedo v. Bricklane Jersey City LLC, et al., Civil Action No. 25-2018, Opinion and Order issued Aug. 13, 2026.
A federal judge denied a default judgment in a wage theft lawsuit against Bricklane Jersey City after finding conflicting evidence regarding the former employee’s pay, allowing the plaintiff to refile with additional proof.
Jersey City, Bricklane Jersey City, wage theft, overtime lawsuit, Fair Labor Standards Act, New Jersey Wage and Hour Law, Alex Acevedo, federal court, restaurant workers, unpaid wages
