Sarte

Sarte v. Henry Industries, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 8, 20252:22-cv-01678California9,139 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRISTINE MCEVOY AND LENG No. 2:22-cv-01678-DJC SAM, individually and on behalf of all 12 others similarly situated, 13 Plaintiff, ORDER 14 v. 15

HENRY INDUSTRIES, INC.,

16 Defendants. 17 18

19 Presently pending before the Court is Plaintiffs’ unopposed Motion for 20 preliminary approval of their Class, FLSA Collective, and PAGA Settlement. The Court 21 initially denied the Motion due to information that was missing. However, upon 22 reviewing the supplemental information filed by the Plaintiffs, the Court now GRANTS 23 Plaintiffs’ Motion contingent upon updating the Proposed Notice as directed by the 24 Court within seven days of this Order. 25 //// 26 //// 27 //// 28 1 BACKGROUND 2 I. Factual and Procedural Background 3 Plaintiffs Christine McEvoy and Leng Sam seek approval of their $300,000 4 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 23 (“Rule 23”) Class, Fair Labor Standards Act 5 (“FLSA”) Collective, and Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”) settlement on behalf of 6 themselves and approximately…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.