Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-02675/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-02675-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:201 Denial of Overtime Compensation

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Armando Flores, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

Metro Valley Painting Corporation,

et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-06-2675-PHX-PGR 

 

SETTLEMENT APPROVAL ORDER

Pending before the Court is the parties’ Updated Joint Motion to Approve

Settlement Agreements and Dismiss Lawsuit (doc. #188-1), wherein the parties

request the approval of two settlement agreements in this Fair Labor Standards

Act overtime pay collective action. Having reviewed the motion, the Court finds

that it should be granted.

The parties have proposed two settlement agreements: the Covarrubis

Settlement Agreement, which involves only named plaintiff Jesus Covarrubias,

and the Second Settlement Agreement, which involves named or opt-in plaintiffs

Armando Flores, Israel Hernandez, Everardo Tapia, Luis Fernando Gonzalez,

Ramon Baeza, Victor de Lao, Miguel Fajardo Domingou, Armando Fajardo D,

Jose Madero, Antonio Marin, Luis Manuel Nunez, Adriana Pena, Wilmer A.

Case 2:06-cv-02675-PGR Document 196 Filed 10/27/09 Page 1 of 4
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

1

 See Counsel’s Declaration in Support of Settlement (doc. #195-1,

Exhibit (C) of the Second Settlement Agreement).

2

 These plaintiffs are Benjamin Aguilar, Juan Aguilar (aka Juan Aguilar

G), Jose Oscar Arrendondo (aka Jose Oscar Arredondo and Jose Oscar

- 2 -

Sanchez, Claudia Solis, Abraham Pena Tavera, Armando Miguel Torres,

Francisco C. Garcia, and Pascual Martinez Chavez.

The Court has reviewed the proposed settlement agreements involving the

nineteen settling plaintiffs and finds that they constitute fair and reasonable

compromises of bona fide disputes under the FLSA. See Lynn’s Food Stores, Inc.

v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1353 (11th Cir.1982) (“When employees bring a

private action for back wages under the FLSA, and present to the district court a

proposed settlement, the district court may enter a stipulated judgment after

scrutinizing the settlement for fairness.”) The Court concludes that the amounts

to be paid to the settling plaintiffs as back wages and liquidated damages, and

the amount to be paid to the plaintiffs’ counsel as mandatory attorneys’ fees, are

fundamentally fair, adequate and reasonable in light of the complicated factual

background of this action.1

 Furthermore, the Court notes that the settling

plaintiffs are represented by counsel experienced in FLSA actions, the settlement

agreements were entered into after the discovery process was concluded, and

there is no evidence that the settlement agreements are the product of collusion

between the parties or are the result of fraud or overreaching on the part of the

defendants.

The parties have also agreed that the remaining thirty-six opt-in plaintiffs

should be dismissed from this action with prejudice on the ground that they have

abandoned the prosecution of this action.2

 As noted by the parties, these

Case 2:06-cv-02675-PGR Document 196 Filed 10/27/09 Page 2 of 4
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

Arredondo Sanchez), Isaura Barron, Fernando Bello, Angel Eduardo Amada

Briseno (aka Angel Eduardo Amado Briseno and Angel Eduardo Amado), Arroslo

Burguett, Adrian Carona, Eliseo de la Cruz (aka Eliseo de la Cruz M. and Eliseo

de la Cruz Magana), Jose Luis de la Cruz (aka Jose Luis de la Cruz M. and Jose

Luis de la Cruz Magna), Ivan Tapia Diosdado, Dulce Fierros (aka Dulce Diana

Fierros), Elio Rascon Figueroa (aka Eliu Rascon Figueroa), Juan Carlos

Figueroa, Jesus Manuel A. Gomez (aka Jesus Manuel Aloudia Gomez and

Manuel Gomes), Karla Hernandez, Ricardo Leyva (aka Ricardo Leyva U. and

Ricardo Urbina Leyva), Ruven Leyva (aka Ruben Leyva), Angel Lopez (aka

Angel Lopez O., Angel Lopez Ocampo, and Angel L. Ocampo), Carlos Isabel

Lopez (aka Carlos L. Lopez and Carlos I. Lopez Lopez), Cesar Lopez (aka Cesar

A.Lopez and Cesar A. Lopez Lopez), Efrain A. Lopez (aka Efrain Antonio Lopez),

Jordan Luna, Benjamin Meraz (aka Benjamin Meraz Anarado, Victor Muniz (aka

Victor manuel Muniz and Victor Muniz Ochoa), Manuel Munez (aka Manuel

Nunez and Juan Manuel Nunez), Roberto Nunes (aka Roberto Nunez), Eleazar

Palomares (aka Eleasar Palomares), Juan Pena (aka Juan Pena T. and Jose

Juan Pena Tavera), Arturo Rangel (aka Autiro Rangel Sosa), Irima Rascon (aka

Ninive Irima Rascon), Jose Luis Ruiz, Antonio Solis, Jesus Alfredo Felix Tomayo

(aka Alfredo Tomayo and Jesus Alfredo Fleliz-Tamayo), Ramon Velasquez, and

Jorge Yanez (aka Jorge Yanez R. and Jorge Yanez Ramos.)

- 3 -

plaintiffs have failed to appear for their deposition or respond to properly

propounded discovery requests, have failed to respond to previous attempts by

the plaintiffs’ counsel or their agents to contact them, have failed to provide the

plaintiffs’ counsel with any updated contact information, and have failed to

respond to a letter from the plaintiffs’ counsel sent to their last known address

advising them that their claims would be dismissed without any compensation

unless they affirmatively responded and contacted the plaintiffs’ counsel by

August 14, 2009. The Court finds that these thirty-six opt-in plaintiffs should be

dismissed from this action with prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) for lack

of prosecution. Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties’ Updated Joint Motion to Approve

Settlement Agreements and Dismiss Lawsuit Replacing the Parties’ Previously

Case 2:06-cv-02675-PGR Document 196 Filed 10/27/09 Page 3 of 4
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

- 4 -

Filed Joint Motion to Approve Settlement Agreements and Dismiss Lawsuit (doc.

#188-1) is granted in its entirety and that the provisions of the Covarrubias

Settlement Agreement and the Second Settlement Agreement are approved.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court retains jurisdiction over the

settling parties to enforce the terms of the Covarrubis Settlement Agreement and

the Second Settlement Agreement.

DATED this 27th day of October, 2009.

Case 2:06-cv-02675-PGR Document 196 Filed 10/27/09 Page 4 of 4