Filed: Jun. 06, 2017
Latest Update: Jun. 06, 2017
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON UNOPPOSED APPLICATION BY DEFENDANTS SI 11, LLC AND SI 43, LLC FOR DETERMINATION OF GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT [Re: ECF 33, 37] BETH LABSON FREEMAN , District Judge . In this disability discrimination action, Plaintiff Dmitry Yanushkevich alleges that he is a "physically handicapped person," a "physically disabled person," and a "person with physical disabilities" as those terms are used in federal and state law. Compl. 6, ECF 1. H
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON UNOPPOSED APPLICATION BY DEFENDANTS SI 11, LLC AND SI 43, LLC FOR DETERMINATION OF GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT [Re: ECF 33, 37] BETH LABSON FREEMAN , District Judge . In this disability discrimination action, Plaintiff Dmitry Yanushkevich alleges that he is a "physically handicapped person," a "physically disabled person," and a "person with physical disabilities" as those terms are used in federal and state law. Compl. 6, ECF 1. He..
More
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON UNOPPOSED APPLICATION BY DEFENDANTS SI 11, LLC AND SI 43, LLC FOR DETERMINATION OF GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT
[Re: ECF 33, 37]
BETH LABSON FREEMAN, District Judge.
In this disability discrimination action, Plaintiff Dmitry Yanushkevich alleges that he is a "physically handicapped person," a "physically disabled person," and a "person with physical disabilities" as those terms are used in federal and state law. Compl. ¶ 6, ECF 1. He sues Fry's Electronics, Inc. ("Fry's") under the federal American with Disabilities Act ("ADA") and state law, alleging that on multiple occasions he encountered architectural barriers at the Fry's Electronics retail store located in Palo Alto, California. Plaintiff also sues the owners of the premises, SI 43, LLC and SI 11, LLC, who have reached a settlement with Plaintiff. Defendants SI 43, LLC and SI 11, LLC ("Moving Parties") have filed an Application for Determination of Good Faith Settlement, see ECF 33, which this Court referred to Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen for a Report and Recommendation, see ECF 36.
The Court has reviewed Judge van Keulen's Report and Recommendation, recommending that the Court grant Moving Parties' unopposed application. See R&R, ECF 37. No objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed and the deadline to object has expired. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2) (deadline for objection is fourteen days after being served with report and recommendation). Fry's, the only party to this suit which is not a party to the settlement, has filed a non-opposition to the application, stating that Fry's "agrees the Court can deem the settlement in good faith." Fry's Electronics' Non-Opposition at 3, ECF 34.
The Court finds the Report and Recommendation to be correct, well-reasoned and thorough. In particular, the Court agrees with Judge van Keulen's conclusions that the settlement in this case properly may be evaluated under California Code of Civil Procedure § 877.6 and that the settlement between Plaintiff and Moving Parties satisfies the requirements of § 877.6. See R&R at 4-5, ECF 37. Accordingly, the Court:
(1) ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation in its entirety; and
(2) GRANTS the Application for Determination of Good Faith Settlement.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
