Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)

13-691 - Rivera v. Harvest Bakery Inc. et al

Download Files


Document in Context
13-691 - Rivera v. Harvest Bakery Inc. et al
September 18, 2015
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER granting 37 Motion to Amend/Correct/Supplement; For the reasons set forth in this opinion, the Plaintiffs motion for leave to amend the complaint is granted. The Plaintiffs are directed to electronically file the PAC within 20 days of the date of this order. It is So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 9/18/2015. (Coleman, Laurie)
January 25, 2016
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION & ORDER granting 42 Motion to Certify Class - For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants the Plaintiffs motion and certifies a class with the following definition, all current and former non-exempt hourly employees who worked for the Harvest Bakery in the State of New York at any time from the six (6) years prior to the filing of this complaint to the entry of judgment in the case. In addition, the Court appoints the named Plaintiffs and Romero as class representatives. So Ordered by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 1/25/2016. (Coleman, Laurie)
September 4, 2018
PDF | More
entirety, and the Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part for the reasons set out in the R&R. SEE ATTACHED DECISION for details. SO ORDERED by Judge Arthur D. Spatt on 9/4/2018. (Coleman, Laurie)MEMORANDUM OF DECISION & ORDER: It has been more than fourteen days since the service of the R&R, and the parties have not filed objections. As such, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b) and Rule 72, this Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error, and finding none, now concurs in both its reasoning and its result. See Cephas v. Nash, 328 F.3d 98, 107 (2d Cir. 2003) (As a rule, a party's failure to object to any purported error or omission in a magistrate judge's report waives further judicial review of the point.); Coburn v. P.N. Fin., No. 13-CV-1006 (ADS) (SIL), 2015 WL 520346, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2015) (reviewing Report and Recommendation without objections for clear error). Accordingly, the Court adopts the R&R in its