Romero v. Arthur Copeland, Inc. et al
Romero and Victor Romero |
Arthur Copeland, Inc, Arthur Copeland, Inc. and Charles Tuzzi |
2:2016cv01247 |
March 14, 2016 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
Central Islip Office |
Anne Y Shields |
Arthur D Spatt |
Labor: Fair Standards |
29 U.S.C. § 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on April 15, 2017. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 21 ORDER DISMISSING CASE re #19 Negotiated Settlement Agreement & Release. As the parties have amended their settlement agreement to reflect the Court's rulings on whether it conformed with Cheeks and its progeny, the settlement is approved. Case closed. SO ORDERED by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 4/15/2017. (Coleman, Laurie) |
Filing 20 Minute Entry for proceedings held on 4/14/2017 before Judge Arthur D. Spatt: Civil Cause for Fairness Hearing. Counsel for Plaintiff: Justin Reilly. Counsel for Defendant: Jasmine Patel. Court Reporter: Dominic Tursi. Case called. Counsel for all sides present. Fairness hearing held. Parties to refile the settlement agreement consistent with the changes addressed by the Court at today's hearing. (Tirado, Chelsea) |
Filing 19 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT revised Settlement Agreement by Victor Romero (Reilly, Justin) |
Electronic SCHEDULING ORDER: the FLSA approval hearing will be held at 10:00 a.m. on 4/14/2017 in Courtroom 1020 of the Long Island Courthouse.So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 4/12/2017. (Fell, Christopher) |
Electronic ORDER Setting Hearing on Motion. As to the parties' joint request #18 for approval of their proposed settlement dismissing this FLSA action with prejudice, the Court will hold an in-person hearing on 4/14/2017 at 09:00 a.m. in Courtroom 1020 of the Long Island Courthouse. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 3/8/2017. (Fell, Christopher) |
Filing 18 Joint MOTION for Settlement Approval of a Fair Labor Standards Act Case by Victor Romero. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support, #2 Exhibit A: Settlement Agreement, #3 Exhibit B: Plaintiff's Damages Chart) (Reilly, Justin) |
Filing 17 Letter regarding settlement of the case by Victor Romero (Reilly, Justin) |
Filing 16 Minute Order. for proceedings held before Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields:Initial Conference Hearing held on 7/21/2016. See Minute Order for details. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields. (Tape #10:56-10:59.) (Torres, Jasmine) |
Filing 15 NOTICE of Appearance by Justin M. Reilly on behalf of Victor Romero (aty to be noticed) (Reilly, Justin) |
Filing 14 Proposed Scheduling Order by Victor Romero (Reilly, Justin) |
Filing 13 ORDER: Initial Conference set for 7/21/2016 10:30 AM in Courtroom 830 before Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields. See Order and Attachment. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields on 6/10/2016. (Attachments: #1 AYS Rules) (Torres, Jasmine) |
Filing 12 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Arthur Copeland, Inc. (Patel, Jasmine) |
Filing 11 ANSWER to #1 Complaint, by All Defendants. (Patel, Jasmine) |
Filing 10 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Victor Romero. Arthur Copeland, Inc. served on 3/17/2016, answer due 6/2/2016. (Greenberg, Neil) |
Filing 9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Victor Romero. Charles Tuzzi served on 4/12/2016, answer due 6/2/2016. (Greenberg, Neil) |
Filing 8 NOTICE of Change of Address by Neil H. Greenberg (Greenberg, Neil) |
Filing 7 ORDER granting #6 motion for an extension of time from 5/2/16 to 6/2/16 for Defendants to appear, answer, move or otherwise plead with respect to the Complaint. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 4/15/16. (Coleman, Laurie) |
Filing 6 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Complaint, by Arthur Copeland, Inc., Charles Tuzzi. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order Stipulation Extending Time to Answer) (Patel, Jasmine) |
Filing 5 SUMMONS ISSUED as to Arthur Copeland, Inc., Charles Tuzzi. (Coleman, Laurie) |
Filing 4 In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to the Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. The form may also be accessed at the following link: #http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO085.pdf. You may withhold your consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent. (Flanagan, Doreen) |
Filing 3 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made. (Flanagan, Doreen) |
Filing 2 Proposed Summons. Re #1 Complaint by Victor Romero (Greenberg, Neil) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filing fee $ 400, receipt number 0207-8451073 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed - No, filed by Victor Romero. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Greenberg, Neil) Modified on 3/14/2016 (Flanagan, Doreen). |
Case Assigned to Judge Arthur D. Spatt and Magistrate Judge Anne Y. Shields. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our #website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. (Flanagan, Doreen) |
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 New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.