SUDA v. SUSHIDEN CORPORATION

Full title: EIJI SUDA, ET AL., Plaintiffs, v. SUSHIDEN CORPORATION, Defendant

Court: United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Mar 23, 2011

10 Civ. 5692 (JGK) (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 23, 2011)

Opinion

10 Civ. 5692 (JGK).

March 23, 2011

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

JOHN KOELTL, District Judge

The parties' settlement of the plaintiffs' FLSA claims is fair and reasonable, and their application for approval of the settlement and dismissal of the suit with prejudice is therefore granted. See, e.g., Boucad v. City of New York, No. 07 Civ. 11098, 2010 WL 4813784, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 16, 2010) (discussing standards to be applied in approving FLSA settlement). There is also a sufficient showing that the amount of the settlement payments should be redacted from the settlement agreement that is filed publicly. See United States v. Amodeo, 71 F.3d 1044, 1050-52 (2d Cir. 1995) (discussing balancing test to be applied when party seeks to file judicial document under seal). The unredacted settlement agreement will be filed under seal.

The parties should submit promptly a proposed judgment and a redacted settlement agreement. The Court will file the unredacted settlement agreement under seal.

SO ORDERED.