Gomez v. Shine Services LLC
- Barbara Moses
- 1:20-cv-04190
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Gomez v. Shine Services LLC, Judge Moses ordered more time to file papers seeking approval of the parties’ settlement.
Luis Gomez and the defendants, who received additional time to submit papers concerning review and approval of their settlement.
What happened
Gomez v. Shine Services LLC is an employment case involving a proposed settlement under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the federal wage-and-hour law. The plaintiff’s lawyer said the parties were still finalizing their agreement and obtaining signatures.
The parties jointly requested an extension of the deadline for filing papers asking the court to review and approve the settlement. Their lawyer said this was the first extension request and that the upcoming holidays could make obtaining signatures difficult.
The court ordered the requested extension. The order is attributed here to Judge Barbara Moses. The exact new deadline is unclear in the provided copy.
The detailed version
- Gomez v. Shine Services LLC · No. 1:20-cv-04190
- Barbara Moses
- Dec. 17, 2020
Background
Plaintiff Luis Gomez, through counsel, filed a letter requesting additional time to submit papers for court review and approval of the parties’ settlement in this Fair Labor Standards Act case. The letter states that the papers were due on December 14, 2020, but that the parties were still finalizing the agreement and collecting signatures.
The letter identifies the request as the parties’ first request for an extension. It also states that the parties were concerned that the upcoming holidays could make it difficult to obtain signatures. The letter cites Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House as the basis for seeking court review and approval of the settlement.
Ruling
The court ordered the extension requested by the parties. The provided text does not clearly show the precise new deadline because that portion is corrupted. The order concerns only additional time to file settlement-review papers; it does not state that the court approved or rejected the settlement itself.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.