Case Activity (11071)

1. Misc | Filed: October 02, 2026 | Entered: October 02, 2026 In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation

   Anti-Trust | New York Eastern

   Letter

   Letter from Rule 23(b)(3) Class Counsel pursuant to the Court's September 30, 2026 Order regarding supplemental information for Epiq's funding request by Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A) (Bernay, Alexandra)

2. Minutes | Filed: October 02, 2026 | Entered: October 02, 2026 Tipton v. BK Venture Group LTD et al

   Labor: Fair Standards | New York Eastern

   Fairness Conference Order on Motion for Settlement ~Util - Set Deadlines

   MINUTE ENTRY for a Telephone Cheeks Hearing re 18 held before Magistrate Judge Seth D. Eichenholtz on 10/2/2026. Appearance for Plaintiff: Brittany Weiner \ Lauren Tipton, plaintiff. Appearance for Defendant: Jeffrey Paul Brodsky.

   The parties have filed a motion for settlement approval 18 , participated in a fairness hearing, and have consented to jurisdiction by a U.S. Magistrate Judge 20 . Having reviewed the settlement agreement and heard the parties' positions, the Court finds that "the agreement reflects a reasonable compromise of disputed issues (rather) than a mere waiver of statutory rights brought about by an employer's overreaching." Le v. SITA Information Networking Computing, USA, Inc., 07-CV-86, 2008 WL 724155, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 13, 2008) (quotations and citation omitted); see also Cheeks v. Freeport Pancake House, Inc., 796 F.3d 199 (2d Cir. 2015).

   In reaching this conclusion, the Court has considered, among other things, (1) the settlement amount as reflected in the settlement agreement is substantial and fair in light of litigation risk and is within the possible range of recovery; (2) that the attorney's fees and costs portion of the settlement is reasonable and commensurate with the degree of success obtained, see Fisher v. SD Protection Inc., 948 F.3d 593, 606-07 (2d Cir. 2020); (3) that the release provided for in the agreement is limited in scope; and (4) that the settlement agreement does not impose a duty of confidentiality. For the reasons above, the terms of the settlement are fair and reasonable and otherwise satisfy the factors set forth in Wolinksy v. Scholastic Inc., 900 F. Supp. 2d 332, 335-36 (S.D.N.Y. 2012). See Fisher, 948 F.3d at 600 (instructing that Wolinksy factors guide fairness inquiry). The settlement is thus approved, and the motion for settlement approval 18 is GRANTED.

   The parties shall file a stipulation of dismissal by 11/9/2026 (CMS: 11:31 - 11:38) (DC)

3. 11069 additional result(s)