Pimentel Collado v. The Amber Avalon Corp. et al

Filing 37

ORDER OF DISMISSAL.... 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 princi ple 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 parti es have also submitted a letter detailing why they believe the proposed settlement agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate. (ECF No. 35.) This Court has reviewed the parties' submissions in order to determine whether the proposed agreeme nt 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 parties' letter, and the terms of the proposed settlement agre ement, 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 parties' request, this Court 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. 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case on the Docket of the Court. SO ORDERED., Motions terminated: 35 MOTION for Settlement Approval. filed by Ariel Antonio Pimentel Collado. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Katharine H. Parker on 7/16/2021) (vfr)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 7/16/2021 PIMENTEL COLLADO, Plaintiff, -against- 20-CV-10410 (KHP) ORDER OF DISMISSAL THE AMBER AVALON CORP., et al., Defendant. KATHARINE H. PARKER, 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. (ECF No. 35.) 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 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 parties’ request, this Court 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. 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case on the Docket of the Court. Dated: New York, New York July 16, 2021 SO ORDERED ________________________________ KATHARINE H. PARKER United States Magistrate Judge Copies to: All counsel (via ECF) 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?