Salazar, et al. v. SYSCO Central California, Inc.

Filing 16

ORDER Directing Parties to Submit Supplemental Briefing Regarding Approval of Settlement signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 12/21/2016; 1. The parties are directed to file a supplemental brief, not to exceed five pages, by no later than Januar y 9, 2017, (a) addressing the applicable standard of review in approving settlements of claims brought pursuant to PAGA, and (b) identifying relevant authority, if any, to support their position; and 2. The parties are further directed to file a copy of the fully executed settlement agreement,1 or alternatively, a sworn declaration describing all relevant terms of the agreement, on which the court may base its decision. (Valdez, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12

JESUS SALAZAR and MATTHEW
VALENCIA,
Plaintiffs,

13
14
15
16

No. 1:15-cv-01758-DAD-SKO

ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES TO SUBMIT
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING REGARDING
APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT

v.
SYSCO CENTRAL CALIFORNIA, INC.,

(Doc. No. 15)
Defendant.

17
18

On December 2, 2016, the parties filed a joint stipulation for approval of a settlement

19

pursuant to California’s Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”). (Doc. No. 15.) Therein, the

20

parties stated that after engaging in mediation, they agreed to a settlement of plaintiff’s

21

representative claims under PAGA. Accordingly, they now seek the court’s approval of the

22

parties’ settlement as to those claims.

23

Under California law, the trial court must “review and approve” any settlement of claims

24

brought pursuant to PAGA. Cal. Lab. Code § 2699(l)(2). In order to review and approve the

25

proposed settlement agreement, however, this court must have before it a copy of the fully

26

executed agreement, or alternatively, a sworn declaration summarizing all relevant terms of the

27

agreement as it pertains to plaintiffs’ PAGA claims. Accordingly, the court hereby orders the

28

parties to file a copy of the proposed settlement agreement, or alternatively, a sworn declaration
1

1

describing all relevant terms of the agreement. In addition, the court directs the parties to submit

2

briefing regarding the appropriate standard of review this court is to apply in the considering and

3

approving a settlement agreement pertaining to PAGA claims.

4

For the reasons set forth above,

5

1. The parties are directed to file a supplemental brief, not to exceed five pages, by no

6

later than January 9, 2017, (a) addressing the applicable standard of review in

7

approving settlements of claims brought pursuant to PAGA, and (b) identifying

8

relevant authority, if any, to support their position; and

9

2. The parties are further directed to file a copy of the fully executed settlement

10

agreement,1 or alternatively, a sworn declaration describing all relevant terms of the

11

agreement, on which the court may base its decision.

12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13

Dated:

December 21, 2016
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1

26
27
28

To the extent the parties’ settlement agreement includes provisions that do not pertain to
plaintiffs’ PAGA claims and that do not require court approval, the parties may request to file
portions of the agreement under seal in accordance with this court’s Local Rules and upon a
showing that “compelling reasons” support such secrecy. See Kamakana v. City & Cty. of
Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1178–80 (9th Cir. 2006).
2