Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-07784/USCOURTS-cand-5_06-cv-07784-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 29:201 Fair Labor Standards Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 1 As used herein, “House Report No. 101-664” refers to House Report No. 101-664, P.l.

101-433, Older Workers Benefit Protection Act, H.R. Rep. 101-664, H.R. Rep. No. 664, 101st

Cong., 2nd Sess. 1990, 1990 WL 200383 (1990). This report reflects congress’ continued intent

that FLSA claims may not be waived or compromised without supervision of either the Secretary

of Labor or a district court.

ORDER, page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

RAUL RIVERAMENTE,

Plaintiff,

v.

BAY FIBERGLASS & PRECAST

MANUFACTURING et al.

Defendants. __________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: C 06- 7784 PVT

ORDER VACATING STIPULATION

AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA” or “Act”) requires employers to pay their

employees time and one-half for work exceeding forty hours per week. See 29 U.S.C. §

207(a)(1). An employee’s claims under the FLSA is non-waivable, and thus may not be settled

without supervision of either the Secretary of Labor or a district court. Yue Zhou v. Wang's

Restaurant, 2007 WL 172308 at * 1 (N.D.Cal. Jan 17, 2007); See also Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc.

v. United States, et al., 679 F. 2d 1350, 1352-53 (11th Cir. 1982); House Report No. 101-664.1

Case 5:06-cv-07784-PVT Document 20 Filed 11/30/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 2Because a stipulation under Rule 41(a)(1) does not involve a order of the court, the

provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) requiring attorney’s fees is not applicable. The Court expresses

no opinion as to the enforceability of any settlement conducted without the approval of either the

Secretary of Labor or the District Court.

Under the FLSA, an award of reasonable fees is mandatory when a settlement of FLSA

claims results in a judgment. See 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) (“The court in such action shall, in addition

to any judgment awarded to the plaintiff or plaintiffs, allow a reasonable attorney's fee to be paid

by the defendant, and costs of the action”). Rule 54(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

defines “Judgment” as “a decree and any order from which an appeal lies.” Thus, even without a

document officially entitled “Judgment,” the FLSA's mandatory attorneys fees provision is

triggered anytime a settlement of FLSA claims results in a final appealable order of the court.

Court determination of whether to award attorneys fees, and if so the amount thereof, is

appropriate in connection with the court's review of the fairness of the settlement of FSLA

claims. 

Accordingly, It Is Hereby Ordered that:

1. The Stipulation and Order of Dismissal is VACATED for lack of a review

of the fairness of the settlement; and

2. No later than December 14, 2007, the parties shall file either a statement

supporting the fairness of the settlement or a stipulation of dismissal under

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1).2

Dated: November 30, 2007

____________________________

PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:06-cv-07784-PVT Document 20 Filed 11/30/07 Page 2 of 2