Salas v. Launderlux, LLC et al

Filing 38

ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND TERMINATING CASE. Re: ECF 34 . Signed by Judge Nathanael Cousins on 8/14/2017. (lmh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/14/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LUCINDA SALAS, United States District Court Northern District of California Plaintiff, 12 ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND TERMINATING CASE v. 13 14 15 Case No. 16-cv-03740 NC LAUNDERLUX, LLC, and others, Re: ECF 34 Defendant. 16 Presented to the Court is a stipulated settlement and proposed order of dismissal. 17 ECF 34. Because one of plaintiff’s claims is under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act 18 (FLSA), approval by either the Secretary of Labor or the Court is required before the claim 19 may be settled. When presented with a proposed settlement of an FLSA claim, the Court 20 “must determine whether the settlement is a fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide 21 dispute over FLSA provisions.” See Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc. v. United States, 679 F.2d 22 1350, 1355 (11th Cir. 1982); Yue Zhou v. Wang’s Restaurant, Case No. 05-cv-0279 PVT, 23 2007 WL 2298046, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2007). 24 The Court reviewed the settlement in open court on August 9. The Court 25 determines that the settlement is fair and reasonable. It is approved. In accordance with 26 the settlement terms, the case is dismissed and the clerk of court is asked to terminate the 27 case administratively. The Court retains jurisdiction solely for the purpose of enforcing 28 Case No. 16-cv-03740 NC 1 2 the settlement agreement and this order. IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 4 Dated: August 14, 2017 5 _____________________________________ NATHANAEL M. COUSINS United States Magistrate Judge 6 7 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case No. 16-cv-03740 NC 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?