Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 27, 2021

Ujiie v. New Life Sushi, Inc.

Judge
John Koeltl
Docket
1:19-cv-10996
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureFlsa
In one sentence

In Ujiie v. New Life Sushi, Judge Koeltl granted the parties’ request to extend their deadline for filing a proposed Fair Labor Standards Act settlement.

Who this affects

The plaintiff and defendants in the case, including New Life Sushi, Inc., 365 Seki, Inc., Bi Hang Cheng, and Zhong Shen Shi, were affected by the extended deadline for filing settlement materials.

What happened

Ujiie v. New Life Sushi, Inc. involved the parties’ joint request for more time to file a motion and proposed agreement settling the plaintiff’s Fair Labor Standards Act claims. The original deadline was May 28, 2021.

The parties asked to move the deadline to June 4, 2021. They cited scheduling difficulties, including counsel’s vacation and busy litigation schedules, as well as the restaurants’ reopening at full capacity.

Judge John G. Koeltl granted the application and extended the filing deadline to June 4, 2021. The opinion does not decide whether the proposed settlement should ultimately be approved.

The detailed version

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

Case
Ujiie v. New Life Sushi, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-10996
Judge
John Koeltl
Date
May 27, 2021

Background

The defendants’ counsel submitted a letter on behalf of all parties requesting an extension of time. The parties sought to file a joint motion and proposed agreement settling the plaintiff’s claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act, along with the proposed settlement agreement required for court review.

The court had previously ordered the parties to file the settlement materials by May 28, 2021. The parties requested a new deadline of June 4, 2021, stating that this was their first request for an extension.

Reasons for the Request

The parties identified several scheduling and logistical reasons for the request. Plaintiff’s counsel had been out of the office on vacation, and counsel for both sides had crowded litigation and counseling schedules. The defendants also stated that their restaurants were reopening at full capacity before the upcoming holiday weekend and that the additional time would help counsel obtain the required signatures.

Ruling

Judge John G. Koeltl granted the application. The parties were permitted to file their joint motion and proposed settlement agreement by June 4, 2021. This order addressed only the filing deadline; the opinion does not state that the court approved the settlement or decide the underlying claims.

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.