Jackson v. Ampac Paper, LLC

Background

The plaintiffs brought collective and class claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. They alleged that hourly manual laborers in the converting department at the defendants’ Walden, New York plant experienced unlawful wage deductions, unpaid work before and after shifts, and wage-statement violations. The court had previously conditionally certified the federal wage claims for collective treatment, and 112 workers filed consent forms to participate.

The proposed settlement covered named plaintiffs, workers who opted into the federal collective action, certain current employees, and other workers employed as non-exempt, hourly converting-department employees at the Walden facility from April 15, 2016, through July 31, 2024. It created a $1,200,000 settlement fund. Each participating class member would receive at least $50 and an additional amount calculated on a prorated basis using counsel’s damages calculations. Some workers would receive payments automatically, while others would need to submit claim forms.

The agreement also provided for service awards of up to $10,000 for each named plaintiff and up to $3,000 for seven opt-in plaintiffs who participated in individualized discovery. Class counsel could seek up to $393,333 in fees, plus specified costs. Class members would receive notice of their rights to opt out, object, attend the fairness hearing, and, where applicable, submit a claim form. Workers who did not timely opt out would be bound by the agreement’s release of state and local wage-and-hour claims, while participating workers would release the federal wage claims asserted in the litigation.

Court’s Analysis

The court applied the standards for preliminary approval of a Rule 23 class settlement and approval of a federal wage-law settlement. It found that the proposed agreement was negotiated at arm’s length by experienced counsel after discovery, review of time and pay records, depositions, and mediation. The court found that the named plaintiffs and their counsel adequately represented the class, the proposed allocation method was reasonable, and the agreement treated class members equitably apart from the proposed service awards.

The court also found that the settlement appeared to be a fair and reasonable compromise of disputed federal wage claims. It considered the possible recovery, the costs and risks of continued litigation, the completed discovery, and the absence of evidence of fraud or collusion. The court noted that counsel estimated participating class members would receive nearly all wages counsel determined were owed, although the court reserved final review of attorney fees and costs.

Provisional Class Certification and Other Rulings

For settlement purposes only, the court provisionally certified a Rule 23(b)(3) class of individuals employed by ProAmpac as non-exempt, hourly converting-department employees at the Walden facility at any point from April 15, 2016, through July 31, 2024. The court found that the class satisfied the requirements of numerosity, commonality, typicality, adequacy, predominance, and superiority. The court stated that the class contained 744 members.

The court appointed Noemy Jackson, Roberto Perez, and Raymundo Gallardo as class representatives. It appointed Robert McCreanor and Patricia Kakalec as counsel for the settlement class. It approved the proposed notices and claim form and directed their distribution. It also granted the request to include all class members who did not timely opt out, subject to the agreement’s terms.

The court granted the plaintiffs’ request to dismiss their claims against ProAmpac LLC a/k/a ProAmpac and Ampac Holdco Inc. a/k/a ProAmpac with prejudice, because those entities were not parties to the settlement agreement and the plaintiffs acknowledged that they did not employ workers at the Walden plant. The clerk was directed to amend the caption to list Ampac Paper, LLC as the sole defendant.

Disposition

Judge Judith C. McCarthy granted the motion for preliminary settlement approval and related relief. The court did not grant final approval of the settlement. It scheduled a fairness hearing for November 14, 2025, before Judge Judith C. McCarthy, where the court would consider final approval and requests for attorney fees, costs, and additional payments. The court also dismissed the claims against ProAmpac LLC and Ampac Holdco Inc. with prejudice and directed that the pending motion be terminated.