Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 9, 2021

Osorio Cabrera v. Hai Cang Seafood Corp.

Judge
Sarah Cave
Docket
1:20-cv-07328
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
FlsaEmploymentCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Osorio Cabrera v. Hai Cang Seafood, Judge Cave approved the FLSA settlement and dismissed the action with prejudice.

Who this affects

The approved settlement and dismissal affected Alejandro Osorio Cabrera and defendants Hai Cang Seafood Corp., Vicky Lou, and Johnny Truong.

What happened

Alejandro Osorio Cabrera and Hai Cang Seafood Corp., Vicky Lou, and Johnny Truong asked the court to approve their settlement in a wage-and-hour case under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The parties agreed that the court could review the settlement.

The court found that the settlement terms, including attorneys’ fees and costs, appeared fair and reasonable under the circumstances. The opinion does not state the settlement amount.

Judge Sarah L. Cave approved the settlement, dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the settlement agreement, and retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement. Any pending motions were declared moot, and the clerk was directed to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Osorio Cabrera v. Hai Cang Seafood Corp. · No. 1:20-cv-07328
Judge
Sarah Cave
Date
Apr. 9, 2021

Background

Alejandro Osorio Cabrera brought this wage-and-hour action under the Fair Labor Standards Act against Hai Cang Seafood Corp., Vicky Lou, and Johnny Truong. The parties consented to the jurisdiction of Magistrate Judge Sarah L. Cave to review their proposed settlement. They submitted a joint motion and a settlement agreement for approval under the standard requiring court review of Fair Labor Standards Act settlements.

Court’s analysis

The court reviewed the parties’ joint submission, the settlement agreement, and the accompanying exhibits. It concluded that all settlement terms—including the allocation of attorneys’ fees and costs—appeared fair and reasonable under the totality of the circumstances and the factors identified in the cited case law. The opinion does not disclose the settlement amount or provide additional details about the agreement’s terms.

Ruling

The court approved the settlement. It dismissed the action with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the settlement agreement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement, declared any pending motions moot, directed the clerk to mark the settlement motion as granted, and directed the clerk to close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.