Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-03914/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-03914-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:206 Collect Unpaid Wages

---

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

Per General Order 45, section X.A, Plaintiff’s Counsel’s e-filing constituted his signature. 1

The court expresses no opinion regarding whether such a dismissal would have a res 2

judicata effect in light of the non-waivable nature of the Fair Labor Standards Act claims.

ORDER, page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

MERCEDES RODRIGUEZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

YONG WON DBA GOOYI GOOYI AND

DOES 1-10,

Defendants.

___________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: C 07-03914 PVT

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S

STIPULATED DISMISSAL

On January 8, 2008, Plaintiff Mercedes Rodriguez (“Plaintiff”) filed a stipulated dismissal to

voluntarily dismiss this case, which included a proposed order. Pursuant to the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure, Rule 41(a)(1)(ii), a voluntary dismissal requires the signatures of all parties who

have appeared in the case. Plaintiff’s filing lacked Defense Counsel’s signature, and accordingly, is

not compliant with the requirements set forth above. 

1

Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1), the parties are not required to obtain a court order to dismiss this

case. However, if the parties want a court order, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act 2

(“FLSA”), Plaintiff must file a declaration setting forth the terms of the proposed settlement. See

Case 5:07-cv-03914-PVT Document 13 Filed 01/10/08 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

“House Report No. 101-664” refers to House Report No. 101-664, P.l. 101-433, Older 3

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.

The holding of this court is limited to the facts and the particular circumstances

4

underlying the present motion.

ORDER, page 2

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 (11 Cir. 1982); and House Report th

No. 101-664. Under the FLSA, an employee’s claims are non- waivable, and thus may not be 3

settled without supervision of either the Secretary of Labor or a District Court. Id. 

The court continued Plaintiff’s January 8, 2008, case management conference to February 12,

2008. Plaintiff shall file any subsequent corrective filings prior to that date. No further continuances

will be granted. Based on the briefs and arguments presented,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the court shall take no action on the stipulated dismissal

filed January 8, 2008.4

Dated: 1/10/08

 

PATRICIA V. TRUMBULL

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:07-cv-03914-PVT Document 13 Filed 01/10/08 Page 2 of 2