Rueda Flores v. Moon JMK Corp.
- Katharine Parker
- 1:24-cv-08991
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Rueda Flores v. Moon JMK Corp., Judge Parker approved the parties’ fair settlement and discontinued the Fair Labor Standards Act case with prejudice and without costs.
The two plaintiffs, the two defendants, and the plaintiffs’ counsel are affected by the court-approved settlement. The court also retains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement’s terms.
What happened
In Rueda Flores v. Moon JMK Corp., the plaintiffs sued Moon JMK Corp. and Chang B. Dong under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties reached an agreement in principle to resolve the case and asked the court to approve their proposed settlement.
The court reviewed the settlement and the parties’ explanation of why it was fair, reasonable, and adequate. It approved the agreement, including its provision for compensating the plaintiffs’ lawyers, and agreed to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement’s terms.
The court discontinued the action with prejudice and without costs and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case. Judge Katharine H. Parker signed the order on May 5, 2025.
The detailed version
- Rueda Flores v. Moon JMK Corp. · No. 1:24-cv-08991
- Katharine Parker
- May 5, 2025
Background
The plaintiffs brought claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The parties consented to the authority of the magistrate judge to decide the case. After reaching an agreement in principle, they submitted a proposed settlement agreement and a letter explaining why they believed the settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate.
Court’s review
Because the case involved claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the court conducted a fairness review of the proposed settlement. The court considered the parties’ submissions, the settlement’s terms, and the relevant circumstances. It found that the agreement was fair, reasonable, and adequate both to address the plaintiffs’ claims and to compensate the plaintiffs’ counsel for legal fees.
Ruling and effect
The court approved the proposed settlement. The order incorporated the agreement’s terms and recognized that the court would retain jurisdiction to enforce them. The action was discontinued with prejudice and without costs, and the Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.