Pimentel Collado v. The Amber Avalon Corp.
- Katharine Parker
- 1:20-cv-10410
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Pimentel Collado v. The Amber Avalon Corp.: Judge Oetken ordered public settlement filings within 30 days for court or Labor Department review.
The plaintiff, Ariel Antonio Pimentel Collado, and the defendants, including The Amber Avalon Corp., were required to submit the settlement materials and supporting information by July 7, 2021.
What happened
In Pimentel Collado v. The Amber Avalon Corp., the parties told the court they had reached a settlement in a Fair Labor Standards Act case. The opinion does not state the settlement’s terms.
The court said the parties may not end the case permanently based on the settlement unless the court or the Department of Labor approves it. Any request for approval must include the settlement agreement and explain why it is fair and reasonable, including information about possible recovery, litigation risks, bargaining, and possible fraud or collusion.
Judge J. Paul Oetken directed the parties to file the required letter or agreement by July 7, 2021. He also required discussion of any genuine dispute about hours or compensation and the attorney’s requested fees, and postponed all other deadlines, conferences, and the trial date indefinitely.
The detailed version
- Pimentel Collado v. The Amber Avalon Corp. · No. 1:20-cv-10410
- Katharine Parker
- June 7, 2021
Background
The court was notified that the parties had reached a settlement in this Fair Labor Standards Act case. The opinion does not describe the claims’ factual allegations or the proposed settlement’s amount or other terms.
Settlement-approval requirements
The court stated that the parties could not dismiss the action with prejudice based on the settlement unless the settlement was approved by either the court or the Department of Labor. The parties were told to file a letter motion and the settlement agreement on the public docket within thirty days of the order.
The letter motion must explain why the proposed settlement is fair and reasonable. It must address the plaintiff’s possible recovery; the burdens and expenses the settlement would avoid; the seriousness of the litigation risks; whether experienced counsel negotiated at arm’s length; and the possibility of fraud or collusion. It must also address whether there is a genuine dispute about the number of hours worked or the compensation owed, and how much the plaintiff’s attorney will seek in fees. The court stated that, absent special circumstances, it would not approve a settlement filed under seal or in redacted form.
Order
The parties were directed to file the required letter or a stipulation by July 7, 2021. The court also postponed all other filing deadlines, conference dates, and the trial date indefinitely. The order did not approve or reject the settlement and did not decide the underlying Fair Labor Standards Act claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.