Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 8, 2025

Harvey Del Valle and Schenelle Sam v. Tapestry

Full caption

Harvey Del Valle and Schenelle Sam, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Tapestry, Inc.

Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Docket
1:25-cv-01715
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Del Valle and Sam v. Tapestry, Judge Ramos directed the parties to submit their reported settlement for court review.

Who this affects

The named plaintiffs, Harvey Del Valle and Schenelle Sam, Tapestry, Inc., and the others whom the plaintiffs identify as similarly situated.

What happened

In Harvey Del Valle and Schenelle Sam v. Tapestry, Inc., the parties told the court that they had settled all issues, so court-ordered mediation did not occur.

The court directed the parties to submit their settlement agreement for review by October 22, 2025. The order does not say that the court approved the settlement.

Judge Edgardo Ramos issued the order on October 8, 2025, requiring court review under the cited Second Circuit decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Harvey Del Valle and Schenelle Sam v. Tapestry · No. 1:25-cv-01715
Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Date
Oct. 8, 2025

Background

The court said it was informed on October 7, 2025, that court-ordered mediation had not been held because the parties represented that they had reached a settlement on all issues.

Order

The court directed the parties to submit their settlement agreement for court review by October 22, 2025. It cited Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015). The order does not state whether the settlement was approved.

Effect

The order requires the parties to provide the settlement agreement for review. It does not describe the underlying claims or make a ruling on them. Judge Edgardo Ramos signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.