Post-distribution/compliance hearing
June 2, 2026 Law and Motion Calendar PAGE 2 Judge: HONORABLE NANCY L. FINEMAN, Department 04 ________________________________________________________________________
2:00 PM LINE 1 21-CIV-03392 LUIS R. CHAVARRIA RAMIREZ, INDIVIDUALLY, AND ON BEHALF OF OTHER MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC SIMILARLY SITUATED VS PROSPECT INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT SERVICES CORPORATION
LUIS R. CHAVARRIA RAMIREZ, INDIVIDUALLY, AND ON BEHALF OF OTHER EDWIN AIWAZIAN MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC SIMILARLY SITUATED PROSPECT INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT SERVICES CORPORATION JASON A GELLER
POST-DISTRIBUTION/COMPLIANCE HEARING
TENTATIVE RULING:
On July 29, 2026 (with written order filed September 4, 2025, this court provided approval of the settlement in this Class Action and Private Attorney’s General Act (PAGA) case and the court set a compliance hearing for June 2, 2026.
On May 28, 2026, Mayra Gonzalez of Phoenix Settlement Administrators (Phoenix), the settlement administrator, filed a declaration setting forth the work that Phoenix performed to disburse the settlement funds, and to comply with its obligations under the settlement agreement and this court’s order. On May 28, 2026, plaintiff filed a status report with this same information.
All disbursements have been made and the time for cashing the checks has passed. The Gonzalez declaration states that there are 275 checks, totaling $119,569.76 that remain uncashed. As previously ordered, the court orders Phoenix to remit the uncashed funds to the Legal Aid at Work. Phoenix is ordered to file in this court a declaration within seven days of notice of entry of order confirming that the funds have been remitted to Legal Aid at Work. The declaration shall be filed, served, and emailed to Department 4. Once this declaration is filed, the case will be fully resolved and shall be closed upon the filing of Phoenix’s declaration confirming the remitting of the funds.
If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the court. Thereafter, counsel for plaintiff shall prepare a written order consistent with the court’s ruling for the court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312, and provide written notice of the ruling to all parties who have appeared in the action, as required by law and the California Rules of Court.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”