Slezak v. Young Men's Christian Association of Maui et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
RICHARD SLEZAK,
Plaintiff,
vs.
YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN
ASSOCIATION OF MAUI, PLANET
FITNESS, (MAUI, HAWAII
LOCATION); MAUI COUNTY,
ALEXANDER & BALDWIN, LLC,
STEVE SCRAGGS, MISTY AMORIN,
JANE DOES 1-10, BRIAN BUSTOS,
ERICA FLORES, JOHN DOES 1-10,
CORPORATIONS 1-10, DOE
PARTNERSHIPS 1-10, DOE
GOVERNMENTAL ENTITIES 1-10,
Defendants.
CIV. NO. 25-00272 SASP-RT
FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATION TO STRIKE
ENTRY OF DEFAULT AND
DENY MOTION FOR DEFAULT
JUDGMENT
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO STRIKE ENTRY OF
DEFAULT AND DENY MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT
Before the Court is pro se Plaintiff Richard Slezak’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion
for Default Judgment (Injunctive Relief Only) Against Defendant Planet Fitness
(Maui, Hawaii Location) (“Motion” or “Motion for Default Judgment”) as
supplemented by Plaintiff’s Supplemental Memorandum in Support of
[Motion]. ECF Nos. 61 & 70. The Court elects to decide the Motion without a
Case 1:25-cv-00272-SASP-RT Document 106 Filed 05/11/26 Page 1 of 8
PageID.<pageID>

2
hearing, pursuant to Rule 7.1(c) of the Local Rules of Practice for the United
States District Court for the District of Hawaii.
The Court FINDS that Plaintiff has not properly served the Summons and
Complaint on an agent authorized to accept service on behalf of Defendant
Planet Fitness (“Planet Fitness”). Accordingly, the Court RECOMMENDS
that the district court DENY the Motion.
RELEVANT BACKGROUND
Plaintiff commenced this case with the filing of his Complaint on July 2,
2025. ECF No. 1. This case arises from, inter alia, Plaintiff’s allegations that
defendants have violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) or
Hawaii Public Accommodations Law. In particular, the instant Motion seeks
default judgment against Planet Fitness at the exclusion of the other defendants
in this case. Plaintiff names the following eight Defendants:
1. Young Men’s Christian Association of Maui (Maui YMCA);
2. Planet Fitness (Maui, Hawaii Location);
3. Maui County;
4. Alexander & Baldwin, LLC;
5. Steve Scraggs;
6. Misty Amorin;
7. Brian Bustos; and
8. Erica Flores.
Id. at PageID.1-2. Plaintiff alleges the following claims:
Case 1:25-cv-00272-SASP-RT Document 106 Filed 05/11/26 Page 2 of 8
PageID.<pageID>

3
Count 1: 	Violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”),
42 United States Code (“U.S.C”) § 12181 et seq. and 42
U.S.C. § 121812(b)(2)(A)(ii));
Count 2: 	Retaliation Under the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §12203(a); and
Count 3: 	Violation of Hawaii Public Accommodations Law
(“HPAL”), Hawaii Revised Statues § 489-3.
Id. at 7. Only Count 1 (ADA) and Count 3 (HPAL) are asserted against Planet
Fitness. Id. at PageID.7. Plaintiff claims that Planet Fitness improperly denied
him access to its exercise equipment and facilities beginning October 2024 to
the present. Id. at 6. Plaintiff claims that he suffers from “severe bilateral hip
arthritis,” and out of medical necessity, due to his disability, he must wear
“specific non-slip sandals.” Id. at 1 & 6. Plaintiff alleges that Planet Fitness
requires him to comply with their athletic shoe policy when using exercise
equipment at its facility, and this constitutes a refusal to accommodate his
disability and a denial of access. Id. at 6.
On July 2, 2025, the Clerk’s Office issued a Summons as to Planet
Fitness. ECF No. 7. Pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
(“Fed. R. Civ. P.”), Plaintiff must serve all defendants a copy of the Summons
and Complaint. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(1). On November 7, 2025, Plaintiff filed a
Proof of Service indicating that a copy of the Summons and Complaint was
served on Planet Fitness. ECF No. 41. Specifically, the Proof of Service
indicates that “Jessica Reyes (GM), who is designated by law to accept service
Case 1:25-cv-00272-SASP-RT Document 106 Filed 05/11/26 Page 3 of 8
PageID.<pageID>

4
of process on behalf of [Planet Fitness (Maui, Hawaii location),]” was served by
a process server named Roselani K. AH Loo. Id.
On November 29, 2025, Plaintiff filed a Request for Clerk’s Entry of
Default Against Planet Fitness (“Request”). ECF No. 56. Plaintiff later filed a
Notice of Errata Regarding Address of Planet Fitness in ECF No. 56, and
corrected the street address of Defendant Planet Fitness from a Kaahumanu
Avenue address to a Ho‘okekle Street Address. ECF No. 57. On December 2,
2025, the Clerk of Court entered default against Planet Fitness. ECF No. 58.
On December 4, 2025, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion seeking an order
granting default judgment against Planet Fitness.
DISCUSSION
When a plaintiff initiates a case by filing a complaint, Fed. R. Civ. P. 4
requires that plaintiff present a summons to the clerk to be issued with the
clerk’s signature. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(a) & (b). Once a summons is issued, the
plaintiff must serve a copy of the summons and complaint on each named
defendant within a certain timeframe. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). If the
defendant is a corporation, Plaintiff must comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)-(j)
regarding who to serve and the method of service. Once the defendants have
been served a copy of the summons and complaint, “[a] defendant must
[typically] serve an answer . . . within 21 days after being served with the
Case 1:25-cv-00272-SASP-RT Document 106 Filed 05/11/26 Page 4 of 8
PageID.<pageID>

5
summons and complaint[.]” Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i). If a defendant fails
to answer or respond, plaintiff may seek an entry of default. Fed. R. Civ.
P.55(a) governs entries of default. Under this statute:
When a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought
has failed to plead or otherwise defend, and that failure is shown by
affidavit or otherwise, the clerk must enter the party’s default.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(a). Once an entry of default is made by the Clerk of Court,
Plaintiff may then seek an entry of default judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
55(b).
In this case, Plaintiff properly obtained a summons and purportedly
served his Summons and Complaint on Planet Fitness. Upon reviewing the
Proof of Service submitted by Plaintiff, the Court noticed that service has not
been properly completed. Planet Fitness is a corporation. Yahoo! Finance,
Planet Fitness, Inc. (PLNT), https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/PLNT/profile/
(last visited May 11, 2026). When serving a corporation in the judicial district
of the United States,
Unless federal law provides otherwise or the defendant’s waiver has been
filed, a domestic or foreign corporation, or a partnership or other
unincorporated association that is subject to suit under a common name,
must be served:
(1) in a judicial district of the United States:
(A) in the manner prescribed by Rule 4(e)(1) for serving an
individual; or
(B) by delivering a copy of the summons and of the
Case 1:25-cv-00272-SASP-RT Document 106 Filed 05/11/26 Page 5 of 8
PageID.<pageID>

6
complaint to an officer, a managing or general agent, or any
other agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive
service of process and—if the agent is one authorized by
statute and the statute so requires—by also mailing a copy of
each to the defendant . . .
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(h)(1). Under Rule 4(e)(1), a corporation may be served in a
judicial district of the United States by:
(1) following state law for serving a summons in an action brought in
courts of general jurisdiction in the state where the district court is located
or where service is made . . .
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(1). The relevant state is the State of Hawaii. Under Hawaii
law, a Summons and Complaint shall be served:
(3) Upon a domestic or foreign corporation or upon a partnership or other
unincorporated association which is subject to suit under a common
name, by delivering a copy of the summons and of the complaint to an
officer, a managing or general agent, or to any other agent authorized by
appointment or by law to receive service of process . . .
Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure (“Haw. R. Civ. P.”) 4(d)(3). In other words,
the Summons and Complaint can be served “by delivering a copy of the
summons and of the complaint to an officer, a managing or general agent,
or any other agent authorized by appointment or by law to receive service
of process . . . ”. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(h)(1) & Haw. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(3) (emphasis
added).
In order to determine who is the authorized agent to accept service on
Case 1:25-cv-00272-SASP-RT Document 106 Filed 05/11/26 Page 6 of 8
PageID.<pageID>

7
behalf of Planet Fitness, Plaintiff should consult the State of Hawaii’s
Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs (“DCCA”). The DCCA’s
website provides the name of the agent who is authorized to accept service on
behalf of Planet Fitness. Business Registration Division, Department of
Commerce & Consumer Affairs, https://hbe.ehawaii.gov/BizEx/home.eb (last
visited May 11, 2026). In this case, the authorized agent’s name listed is not
“Jessica Reyes (GM).” ECF No. 41. Contrary to the Proof of Service, Jessica
Reyes (GM) is not designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of
[Planet Fitness (Maui, Hawaii location)]. The Court thus FINDS that service
has not been properly completed. Because service of the Summons and
Complaint are incomplete, the entry of default should not have been issued.
Accordingly, the Motion for Default Judgment should be DENIED.
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, the Court FINDS that Plaintiff failed to serve
Planet Fitness a copy of the Summons and Complaint. The Court
RECOMMENDS that the district court STRIKE the Proof of Service filed on
November 7, 2025 (ECF No. 41) and the Clerk’s Entry of Default filed on
December 2, 2025 (ECF No. 58).
//
//
Case 1:25-cv-00272-SASP-RT Document 106 Filed 05/11/26 Page 7 of 8
PageID.<pageID>

8
The Court further recommends that the district judge DENY the Motion
for Default Judgment (ECF No. 61), and set a new deadline for Plaintiff to serve
his Summons and Complaint.
IT IS SO FOUND AND RECOMMENDED.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, May 11, 2026.
Civ. No. 25-00272 SASP-RT; Richard Slezak vs. Young Men's Christian
Association of Maui, Planet Fitness, (Maui, Hawaii Location); Maui County,
Alexander & Baldwin, LLC, Steve Scraggs, Misty Amorin, Jane Does 1-10, Brian
Bustos, Erica Flores, John Does 1-10, Corporations 1-10, Doe Partnerships 1-
10, Doe Governmental Entities 1-10; Findings and Recommendation to Strike
Entry of Default and Deny Motion for Default Judgment
Rom A. Trader
United States Magistrate Judge
Andrade
Case 1:25-cv-00272-SASP-RT Document 106 Filed 05/11/26 Page 8 of 8
PageID.<pageID>