Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

-----------------------------------------------------------------X

THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES

OF THE LOCAL 1102 RETIREMENT TRUST,

Plaintiffs,

MEMORANDUM

v. AND ORDER

25-CV-5961-SJB-ST

JERR SHOES, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

-----------------------------------------------------------------X

BULSARA, United States District Judge:

Plaintiffs, The Members of the Board of Trustees of the Local 1102 Retirement

Trust, have requested a sum certain default judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 55(b)(1). (See Pls.’ Req. for Issuance of Default J. by the Clerk dated Jan. 7,

2026 (“Pls.’ Req.”), Dkt. No. 9). For the reasons below, the request for a sum certain

default is denied without prejudice to renew as a motion for default judgment under

Rule 55(b)(2).

“A claim is not a sum certain unless there is no doubt as to the amount to which

a plaintiff is entitled as a result of the defendant’s default.”  KPS & Assocs., Inc. v.

Designs By FMC, Inc., 318 F.3d 1, 19 (1st Cir. 2003).  The cases that fall into that category

are exceptionally narrow: they involve “actions on money judgments, negotiable

instruments, or similar actions where the damages sought can be determined without

resort to extrinsic proof.” Bricklayers & Allied Craftworkers Loc. No. 3, New York, AFL-CIO

(Rochester Chapter) v. Precision Concrete & Masonry, Inc., No. 16-CV-6035, 2018 WL

4090331, at *2 (W.D.N.Y. Aug. 28, 2018) (quotation omitted). “If a claim is not for a sum

certain, the plaintiff must apply to the court for entry of default judgement under Rule

55(b)(2).” Id. (citing Priestley v. Headminder, Inc., 647 F.3d 497, 504–05 (2d. Cir. 2011));

Trs. of Loc. 1034 Pension Tr. Fund v. Superior Limousine Serv., Inc., No. 22-CV-5684, 2023

WL 11885063, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. July 21, 2023) (“Where the amount of damages owed

requires a judicial finding, a default judgment may be entered once the court has

conducted a hearing or made a referral to determine the question of damages.” (citing

Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2))), report and recommendation adopted, Order (Aug. 23, 2023).

In a claim for unpaid contributions under the Employee Retirement Income

Security Act, which Plaintiffs note is treated in the same manner as an unpaid

withdrawal liability claim such as this, (Decl. of Matthew P. Rocco in Supp. of Pls.’ Req.

for Issuance of Default J. dated Jan. 7, 2026, attached to Pls.’ Req. as Attach. 1, Dkt. No.

9-1 ¶ 25), courts in this Circuit generally require plaintiffs seeking a default judgment to

proceed through Rule 55(b)(2), with an application to the court, which includes a

memorandum of law. See Bricklayers & Allied Craftworkers, 2018 WL 4090331, at *3

(“After an exhaustive search of Second Circuit caselaw, this Court found only one other

analogous case where the court awarded a ‘sum certain’ to plaintiffs under Rule

55(b)(1).”). And Plaintiffs do not provide the Court with information as to the

calculation of the withdrawal liability amount. See Trs. of Loc. 1034 Pension Tr. Fund,

2023 WL 11885063, at *3 n.11 (finding that plaintiffs’ withdrawal liability claims were

also “not well suited to recovery for a sum certain” because plaintiffs never explained

how they calculated the amount due and did not satisfy their burden of establishing

their right to recover—even where the court would not make an independent

determination as to the reasonableness of the plan sponsor’s assessment).

Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ request is denied. Plaintiffs are directed to file a motion

for default judgment, consistent with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2) and Local

Rule 55.2, by March 13, 2026.

SO ORDERED.

/s/ Sanket J. Bulsara

SANKET J. BULSARA

United States District Judge

Date: January 12, 2026

Central Islip, New York