OConner v. Agilant Solutions, Inc.

Background

The parties advised the court that they had reached a settlement in a case brought by Javan OConner, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, against Agilant Solutions, Inc., doing business as ASI System Integration, Inc. The settlement included claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The order established the procedures the parties had to follow to resolve the case; it did not approve the settlement or enter a dismissal.

FLSA dismissal procedures

The court relied on the Second Circuit’s decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., which held that FLSA claims cannot be dismissed with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A) without court approval. A dismissal with prejudice permanently bars the dismissed claims from being brought again. To seek that type of dismissal, the parties had to proceed under Rule 41(a)(2).

The court first ordered the parties to discuss whether they would consent under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) to having all further proceedings handled by the assigned magistrate judge. If both parties consented, they had to file the required executed consent form by September 3, 2020. If either party declined, the parties had to file a joint letter by that date stating that they did not consent, without identifying the nonconsenting party. The order stated that withholding consent would not have negative consequences.

If the parties did not consent to proceed before the magistrate judge, they had to submit a joint motion by September 10, 2020 explaining why the settlement was fair and should be approved. The motion had to address the factors identified in Wolinsky v. Scholastic Inc. and include the settlement agreement. The court also stated that it would not approve a settlement containing a confidentiality provision. Documents related to the settlement review could not be filed under seal unless the parties made a particularized showing overcoming the presumption of public access.

If the settlement included attorney’s fees, the parties had to address whether the fees were reasonable under the framework identified in Goldberger v. Integrated Resources, Inc. Plaintiffs’ attorneys also had to provide detailed time records for the court’s review.

Dismissal without prejudice

The court stated that the Second Circuit had reserved the question whether parties may voluntarily dismiss FLSA claims without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1)(A). A dismissal without prejudice generally does not bar the claims from being brought again. The court therefore stated that it would accept a stipulation dismissing the FLSA claims without prejudice, provided the parties submitted that stipulation by September 3, 2020.

Disposition

Judge Gregory H. Woods directed the parties to follow either the court-approval process for a dismissal with prejudice or the stipulation process for a dismissal without prejudice. The order did not grant or deny a motion to dismiss, rule on the merits of the FLSA claims, or finally dispose of the case.