Garcia Santana et al v. Rego Furniture Inc. et al

Filing 144

ORDER OF DISMISSAL: It is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The Court finds that the terms of the proposed settlement agreement are fair, reasonable, and adequate, both to redress Plaintiff's claims in this action and to compensate Plaintiff&# 039;s counsel for their legal fees, and the agreement is therefore approved. 2. In accordance with the proposed settlement agreement, the Southern District of New York will retain jurisdiction over this matter for the purpose o f enforcing the settlement agreement, if necessary. 3. As a result of the Courts approval of the parties' proposed settlement, this action is hereby discontinued with prejudice and without costs, provided, however, that, wit hin 30 days of the date of this Order, if any aspect of written documentation of the settlement is not completed, then Plaintiff may apply by letter for the restoration of the action to the active calendar of the Court. 4. The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to close this case on the Docket of the Court. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Jennifer E Willis on 10/25/2022) (tg)

Case 1:18-cv-02799-JW Document 144 Filed 10/25/22 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
EMETERIO GARCIA SANTANA and
JOSE GUZMAN, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,

18-cv-2799 (JW)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

-againstREGO FURNITURE INC., d/b/a EASY
SHOPPING, FORTUNE DISTRIBUTOR
OF THIRD AVENUE INC., d/b/a EASY
SHOPPING, Z&G DISTRIBUTORS, INC.,
d/b/a EASY SHOPPING, SAMI
ZEITOUNE, ELI YAHU GREGO, SAMI
ZEE, and FORTUNE DIST. CORP., d/b/a
EASY SHOPPING,
Defendants.

JENNIFER E. WILLIS, United States Magistrate Judge:
In this action under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor
Law, which is before this Court on the consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
636(c), the parties, having reached an agreement in principle to resolve the action,
have placed their proposed settlement agreement before this Court for approval. See
Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 1999 (2d Cir. 2015) (requiring
judicial fairness review of FLSA settlements). The parties have also submitted a
letter detailing why they believe the proposed settlement agreement is fair,
reasonable, and adequate. Dkt. No. 143. This Court has reviewed the parties’
submissions in order to determine whether the proposed agreement represents a
reasonable compromise of the claims asserted in this action, and, in light of the
totality of the relevant circumstances, including the representations made in the

Case 1:18-cv-02799-JW Document 144 Filed 10/25/22 Page 2 of 2

parties’ letter and the terms of the proposed settlement agreement, it is hereby
ORDERED that:
1.

The Court finds that the terms of the proposed settlement agreement

are fair, reasonable, and adequate, both to redress Plaintiff’s claims in this action and
to compensate Plaintiff’s counsel for their legal fees, and the agreement is therefore
approved.
2.

In accordance with the proposed settlement agreement, the Southern

District of New York will retain jurisdiction over this matter for the purpose of
enforcing the settlement agreement, if necessary.
3.

As a result of the Court’s approval of the parties’ proposed settlement,

this action is hereby discontinued with prejudice and without costs, provided,
however, that, within 30 days of the date of this Order, if any aspect of written
documentation of the settlement is not completed, then Plaintiff may apply by letter
for the restoration of the action to the active calendar of the Court.
4.

The Clerk of Court is respectfully requested to close this case on the

Docket of the Court.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: New York, New York
October 25, 2022
________________________________
JENNIFER E. WILLIS
United States Magistrate Judge

2