Smith v. Superior Farms

Opinion

Ryan Smith, No. 2:20-cv-01778-KJM-DB Plaintiff, ORDER v. Superior Farms, 1S Defendant. The court has reviewed the parties’ stipulated request to dismiss this action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41, ECF No. 18. The court grants the request to dismiss. As provided by the stipulation the court dismisses with prejudice plaintiff Ryan Smith’s individual claims. However, the putative class and collective action claims asserted in the complaint, ECF No. 1, are dismissed without prejudice. The court is satisfied that dismissal does not prejudice the putative class, given this case is only a year old and there is nothing in the record indicating class members are likely to have relied on this action to vindicate their interests. See Del Rio v. CreditAnswers, LLC, No. 10-346, 2011 WL 1869881, at *2 (S.D. Cal. May 16, 2011) (the court may consider “‘whether the proposed settlement and dismissal are tainted by collusion or will prejudice absent putative members with a reasonable reliance expectation of the maintenance of the action for the protection of their interests,’” and the court may “‘inquire into possible prejudice from... lack of adequate time for class members to file other actions, because of a

rapidly approaching statute of limitations.’” (quoting Diaz v. Trust Territory of Pac. Islands, 876 F.2d 1401, 1407-08 & n.3 (9th Cir. 1989))); see, e.g., Castro v. Zenith Acquisition Corp., No. 06-04163, 2007 WL 81905, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2007). All parties are to bear their own costs and fees. The motion for approval of settlement is denied as moot. The Clerk of Court is directed toclose the case. This order resolves ECF Nos. 15 & 18. DATED: November 17, 2021. [\ (] l ti / { q_/ "1 CHIEF NT] ED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE