Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 22, 2025

Wang v. Hainan Hnat-Management LLC

Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Docket
1:24-cv-04251
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Wang v. Hainan Hnat-Management, Judge Ramos granted the parties’ request for 14 more days, setting November 5, 2025, to submit their settlement agreement for review.

Who this affects

The parties in Wang v. Hainan Hnat-Management (US) LLC were affected because the court extended the deadline to submit their settlement agreement for review to November 5, 2025.

What happened

Wang v. Hainan Hnat-Management (US) LLC involved the parties’ request for more time to finalize and submit a settlement agreement for court review.

The parties jointly requested an additional 14 days from October 22, 2025. They said they were still finalizing the settlement terms and asked to extend the submission deadline to November 5, 2025.

Judge Edgardo Ramos granted the request. The deadline to submit the settlement agreement for review was November 5, 2025.

The detailed version

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

Case
Wang v. Hainan Hnat-Management LLC · No. 1:24-cv-04251
Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Date
Oct. 22, 2025

Background

The defendant, Hainan Hnat-Management (US) LLC, through its counsel, submitted a joint request made with the consent of the plaintiff’s counsel. The parties were finalizing the terms of a settlement agreement and needed to submit it for court review under the procedure discussed in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc.

Request

The parties asked for 14 additional days from October 22, 2025, to submit the settlement agreement. They requested a new deadline of November 5, 2025.

Ruling

Judge Edgardo Ramos granted the request. The order set November 5, 2025, as the deadline to submit the settlement agreement for review. The opinion does not state whether the court approved the settlement or resolve any underlying claims.

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.