IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

SARAH CARTEE,

Plaintiff,

v.

BBK BUSINESS, LLC, BIJAYA BHUSAL 

AND DIRGA KANDEL, INDIVIDUALLY,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

 

Case No. 4:24-cv-50-SDJ

 

MOTION REQUESTING DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE CONTINGENT UPON THE 

COURT’S RETENTION OF LIMITED CONTINUING JURISDICTION 

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

Plaintiff Sara Cartee brings this Motion Requesting Dismissal With Prejudice Contingent 

Upon the Court’s retention of Limited Continuing Jurisdiction, and in support thereof and would 

show as follows:

1. This case is an individual action brought under the federal Fair Labor Standards 

Act (“FLSA”), through which Plaintiff sought to recover from Defendants unpaid overtime wages, 

liquidated damages, interest, litigation costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees.

2. After extensive negotiation, the Plaintiff and counsel for Defendants have come to 

an agreement to settle and compromise any and all matters and disputes in the above-referenced 

cause. 

3. Plaintiff and Defendants have signed a settlement agreement whereby all payments 

required under the parties’ settlement agreement are to be paid out over the course of several

months, with the last payment being due on or about March 1, 2025. Plaintiff and Defendants 

Case 4:24-cv-00050-SDJ Document 11 Filed 09/27/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 25
2

have agreed to the Court’s retention of continuing ancillary jurisdiction through this period in order 

to permit this payout, and in the event, for whatever reason, the payout does not occur as 

anticipated. 

4. The parties’ request for dismissal with prejudice is contingent upon the Court’s 

retention of continuing ancillary jurisdiction through March 1, 2025 in order to permit payout of 

the settlement amounts. 

5. Subject to the Court’s retention of continuing jurisdiction as requested above, 

Plaintiff moves for the administrative closure and dismissal with prejudice of the above-styled and 

numbered lawsuit and all claims therein. The parties shall each bear their own costs except as 

provided in their settlement agreement. 

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff moves that, in accordance with the 

agreement of the parties, that the Court retain continuing ancillary jurisdiction over enforcement 

of this cause through March 1, 2025 in order to permit Plaintiff to seek this Court’s assistance 

should the settlement agreement payouts not proceed as anticipated. Contingent upon the Court’s 

retention of such jurisdiction, Plaintiff moves that the Court administratively close this cause and 

dismiss this cause with prejudice to its refiling.

Respectfully Submitted,

WELMAKER LAW, PLLC

409 N. Fredonia, Suite 118

Longview, Texas 75601

Tel: (512) 499-2048

By: /s/ Douglas B. Welmaker

Douglas B. Welmaker

Texas State Bar No. 00788641

doug@welmakerlaw.com

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

Case 4:24-cv-00050-SDJ Document 11 Filed 09/27/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 26
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on this the 27th day of September 2024, I electronically submitted this document 

for filing using the Court’s CM/ECF system, and forwarded same to defense counsel, who has already 

approved of this filing. 

/s/ Douglas B. Welmaker

Douglas B. Welmaker

Case 4:24-cv-00050-SDJ Document 11 Filed 09/27/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 27