Mejorado v. Rainbow Sandals, Inc.

18

The final accounting hearing is scheduled for October 29, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. in Department CX105. Plaintiffs shall submit a final administrator’s report at least 9 court days before the hearing addressing the status of the settlement administration, including the actual amounts paid to the aggrieved employees and the other amounts distributed under the settlement, including any uncashed checks. Plaintiffs are ordered to give notice, including to the LWDA, and to file a proof of service. 10

Masadas v. California Dinner Entertainment, LLC

2023-01349443 Off calendar. 11 Parcell v. California Dinner Entertainment, LLC

2023-01350262

Off calendar. 12 Mejorado v. Rainbow Sandals, Inc.

2022-01283098

Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action and PAGA Settlement The court has reviewed and considered the papers, including the supplemental papers, filed in support of plaintiff’s motion for preliminary approval of a $250,000 class action and PAGA settlement. Subject to plaintiff’s submission of the documents identified below, the court grants the motion as follows: $5,000.00 for enhancement award to plaintiff (not to exceed); $75,000.00 for attorneys’ fees (not to exceed); $15,000.00 for attorneys’ costs (not to exceed); $4,995.00 for settlement administration fees (not to exceed); and $20,000.00 total PAGA penalties ($15,000.00 to LWDA).

Plaintiff is ordered to file and serve by July 23, 2026 a revised proposed order (stating the above amounts) with all exhibits attached as follows: Exhibit 1, fully executed copies of the settlement agreement and first and second amendments thereto; and Exhibit 2, the notice packet (in English and Spanish). The citations to the exhibits in the proposed order should be updated accordingly and paragraph 13 of the proposed order should be revised. In addition, the “Workweek Challenge Form” should be revised to include pay periods.

The final approval hearing is scheduled for December 10, 2026 at 2:00 p.m. in Department CX105. The motion for final approval shall be filed at least 16 court days before the hearing. See Department CX105 Guidelines for Approval of Class Action Settlements and PAGA Settlements (www.occourts.org).

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice, including to the LWDA, and to file a proof of service. No earlier hearing date is available for this motion. 13 Parra v. Fueling and Service Technologies, Inc.

2025-01493605

Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action and PAGA Settlement The court has reviewed and considered the papers filed in support of plaintiff’s motion for preliminary approval of a $385,000 class action and PAGA settlement. The court has the following questions and comments: As to the settlement: 1. Plaintiff should state in a declaration filed with the court whether he anticipates receiving any compensation for any individual claims, the work he has done on the case, and the estimated number of hours he has spent working on the case.

2. The “Released Parties” provision in paragraph 1.42 is overbroad, as it includes unidentified, unrelated and/or ambiguous third parties such as “and their respective owners, officers, directors, agents, attorneys, managers, insurers, and partners.”

3. The court prefers a 60-day period for the submission of exclusions, objections and disputes. Are there special circumstances here that warrant the shorter period the parties propose? See, e.g., Settlement Agreement ¶¶ 1.44, 7.4.4, 7.5.1, 7.6, 7.7.2.

4. The “Response Deadline” provision in paragraph 1.44 should include disputes.

5. The parties (plaintiff and defendant) should advise, in declarations filed with the court, whether, after making reasonable inquiry and since the time the settlement agreement was signed, they have become aware of any class, representative or other collective action in any court that asserts claims similar to those asserted in this action and, if any such actions are known to exist, the declarations shall also state the name and case number of any such case and the procedural status of that case, and describe the impact of the settlement on that case.

6. The phrase “Aggrieved Employees” should be inserted in the first sentence of paragraph 5 after “Class Members” and before “and Class Counsel.”

7. The second-to-last sentence in paragraph 5.2 should be removed as its meaning and purpose are unclear.

8. The dispute procedure in the second-to-last sentence in paragraph 7.6 should be revised to state: (i) the parties shall file with the court all disputes submitted by class members, the evidence submitted, and the resolution of the