Cantoran et al v. DDJ Corporation et al

Filing 37

OPINION & ORDER: Therefore, as plaintiffs have not pointed to any controlling decisions that the Court overlooked in its June 2 order, see Analytical Surveys, Inc. v. Tonga Partners, L.P., 684 F.3d 36, 52 (2d Cir. 2012), the Court denies the motio n for reconsideration. However, the Court grants the requested 30-day extension. By July 20, 2016, the parties must pursue one of the three courses of action set out in the June 2 order or they must submit briefing, not to exceed 15 pages, in support of the position that an accepted Rule 68 offer of judgment is not subject to judicial approval in an FLSA case. If the parties pursue the latter course, they should address whether the Rule 68 offer in this case would fully satisfy plaintiffs' individual claims, i.e., whether the offer matches or exceeds the maximum amount of damages plaintiffs could recover at trial. (As further set forth in this Order) (Signed by Judge Paul A. Engelmayer on 6/16/2016) (kl)