Kumar v. Tech Mahindra (Americas) Inc.
Plaintiff: Pankaj Kumar
Defendant: Tech Mahindra (Americas) Inc.
Case Number: 4:2016cv00905
Filed: June 20, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office: St. Louis Office
County: St. Louis - County
Presiding Judge: John A. Ross
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 201
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
RSS Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 30, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 153 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs' Joint Motion for Approval of FLSA Collective Action Settlement (Doc. 149 ), is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties' request to certify an FLSA Collective f or purposes of the settlement only is GRANTED. The Court certifies an FLSA Collective consisting of Named Plaintiff and the Collective Action Members, as listed in Exhibit 1 to the Settlement Agreement. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plain tiffs' Counsel's unopposed request for attorneys' fees, as set forth in Plaintiffs Memorandum in Support of Joint Motion for Approval (Doc. 151 ), is GRANTED. The Court specifically finds that this was a complex, years-long case invol ving dozens of plaintiffs, that the outcome was unclear, that counsel undertook significant risk in pursuing the case. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties' requests for costs, Named Plaintiff service payments, and a Settlement Administration Fund, as set forth in Plaintiffs Memorandum in Support of Joint Motion for Approval (Doc. 151 ), are GRANTED. The Court specifically finds that, given the involvement of the named Plaintiffs, the proposed service awards are fair and reasonable.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that within seven (7) days of Plaintiffs' Counsel's receipt of the settlement checks from Defendant, the parties shall file with the Court a joint stipulation of dismissal of the litigation with prejudice, and take any furt her action necessary for the Court to dismiss the litigation.IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the Court will retain jurisdiction over the construction, interpretation, implementation, and enforcement of the settlement, but directs the Clerk to ADMINISTRATI VELY CLOSE the case until such time as such issue arises. The Court finds, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b), that there is no just reason for delay, and directs the Clerk to enter this Order of Approval.. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 9/30/19. (KKS)
March 25, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 144 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Tech Mahindra (Americas) Inc.'s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 119 ), is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as set forth herein. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 3/25/2019. (CLO)
March 5, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 90 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Pankaj Kumar's Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint (Doc. 84 ), is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a telephone conference to discuss any scheduling issues is schedule d for Wednesday, March 14, 2018 at 11:30 p.m. Counsel is directed to call the conference toll free at 1-877-810-9415. The access code to enter the telephone conference for all participants is: 7519116., ( Telephone Conference set for 3/14/2018 11:30 AM in Telephone before District Judge John A. Ross.). Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 3/5/18. (KKS)
July 26, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 46 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER:IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Pankaj Kumars Motion for Conditional Class Certification and Court-Authorized Notice (Doc. 39 ) is GRANTED in part, and the Court conditionally certifies a class of: All U1-U3 band IT Delive ry Engineers employed by Tech Mahindra who were classified as exempt during any workweek at any time three (3) years prior to October 5, 2016 through the entry of judgment. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Pankaj Kumar is conditionally authoriz ed to act as class representative. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Nichols Kaster, PLLP law firm is authorized to act as class counsel. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file his amended proposed Notice of Lawsuit and Consent to Join Colle ctive Action against Tech Mahindra (Americas) Inc. on or before August 8, 2017. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Tech Mahindra (Americas) Inc. shall file any objections to Plaintiffs amended proposed Notice no later than five (5) days after it is filed. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Tech Mahindra (Americas) Inc. shall produce to Kumar a list of all potential class members, including their current or last known mailing addresses, dates of employment, and email addresses, if known, in a computer-readable electronic data file format, no later than August 25, 2017. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 7/26/17. (JAB)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Kumar v. Tech Mahindra (Americas) Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Pankaj Kumar
Represented By: Benjamin F. Westhoff
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Tech Mahindra (Americas) Inc.
Represented By: Jeremy Michael Brenner
Represented By: Jovita M. Foster
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?