Javier Ortiz v. Madrid Bakery LLC

Background

The court was advised that the parties had reached a settlement in the case, including claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), a federal law governing wages and working conditions. The order did not state the settlement’s terms and did not itself approve the settlement or dismiss any claims.

Procedures for an FLSA Settlement

The court described three alternatives:

1. Court approval for dismissal with prejudice. The parties could seek court approval under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2) to dismiss the FLSA claims with prejudice, meaning the claims would be ended and could not be brought again. The court explained that the Second Circuit’s decision in Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc. requires this approval for a dismissal with prejudice of FLSA claims.

The parties first had to discuss whether they would consent under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) to having all further proceedings conducted by the assigned magistrate judge. If both consented, they had to file the required executed consent form by May 23, 2022. If either party did not consent, the parties had to file a joint letter by that date stating that they did not consent, without identifying the nonconsenting party or parties. 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 file a joint motion by June 23, 2022 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 stated that it would not approve settlement agreements containing a confidentiality provision and would not allow settlement-related documents to be filed under seal without a particularized showing overcoming the presumption of public access to judicial documents. If the settlement included attorney’s fees, the parties also had to address whether the fees were reasonable and provide detailed attorney time records.

2. Dismissal without prejudice when there was no FLSA settlement. The parties could submit a stipulation dismissing the FLSA claims without prejudice, meaning the claims would not be permanently barred from being brought again, under Rule 41(a)(1)(A). They also had to certify that there had been no settlement of the FLSA claims. The stipulation and certification were due by June 23, 2022. If the parties could not make that certification, the court required them to seek approval under the first alternative.

3. Offer of judgment. The parties could resolve the case through an offer and acceptance of judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68(a). The court explained that, under the cited Second Circuit decision, court approval was not required for a Rule 68(a) offer of judgment involving FLSA claims. Any executed offer and acceptance, together with a proposed order entering judgment consistent with those documents, was due by June 23, 2022.

Disposition

Judge Gregory H. Woods issued an order directing the parties to follow one of these procedures. The opinion did not grant or deny a motion, approve the settlement, dismiss the claims, or enter judgment. It set deadlines of May 23, 2022, and June 23, 2022, for the required submissions.