Cuizon v. George & Frank's Japanese Noodle Rest. Inc.
- Alison Nathan
- 1:18-cv-00549
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Cuizon v. George & Frank’s, Judge Nathan ordered settlement exhibits filed by August 21, 2020, warning of possible dismissal.
The plaintiffs and defendants were required to submit the missing settlement exhibits, and the plaintiffs were specifically warned that failure to meet the deadline could lead to dismissal.
What happened
Cuizon v. George & Frank’s Japanese Noodle Restaurant involved a proposed settlement in a Fair Labor Standards Act case. The parties referred to a damages calculation and plaintiff counsel’s billing records, but did not attach those exhibits.
The court had previously ordered the parties to submit both exhibits by August 7, 2020. Because they had not been submitted, the court gave the parties until August 21, 2020, to file them.
Judge Alison J. Nathan warned the plaintiffs that failing to meet the deadline could result in dismissal for failure to prosecute. The order did not decide whether the settlement should be approved.
The detailed version
- Cuizon v. George & Frank's Japanese Noodle Rest. Inc. · No. 1:18-cv-00549
- Alison Nathan
- Aug. 17, 2020
Background
The parties in this Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case submitted a proposed settlement agreement and joint letter for court review under the procedure required by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit's decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. The parties' filing referred to Exhibit B, described as a damages calculation, and Exhibit C, described as plaintiff counsel's billing records. Neither exhibit was attached.
Court's Order
On July 30, 2020, the court ordered the parties to submit the two exhibits by August 7, 2020. The court stated that it had still not received them and ordered the parties to submit them no later than August 21, 2020.
Warning and Effect
Judge Alison J. Nathan warned the plaintiffs that failure to strictly comply with the deadline could result in dismissal of the action for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward. The order did not approve or reject the settlement and did not decide the underlying FLSA claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.