AVI Food Systems, Inc.
16 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2016–2025)
1 trusted published court opinion across 1 distinct case · 1 docket-only case without a recorded end date
What public court records show
Public federal court records list AVI Food Systems, Inc. as an employer in 16 distinct federal employment cases between 2016 and 2025.
The most common claims on record were Wage Theft.
Cases were filed across 1 state (NY).
These figures summarize publicly available U.S. federal court records only. Most workplace disputes are resolved privately and never appear in litigation. A case outcome reflects many factors and is not a finding that any employer violated the law.
Written decisions across 1 distinct case.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
AVI Food Systems, Inc. appears in one trusted published federal employment opinion:
Castillo v. Avi Food Systems, Inc. (2025) — Settlement. Bianca Castillo filed a wage theft case against AVI Food Systems, claiming the company violated federal wage laws by not properly paying her. The dispute involved whether the employer followed rules requiring fair compensation for work performed. Read the ruling.
The published opinion involves a wage theft claim. Browse other wage theft rulings for comparable fact patterns and how courts have ruled. Wage Theft.
The published opinion came from New York. New York is an EEOC deferral state, which extends the federal Title VII / ADA / ADEA filing deadline from 180 to 300 days. New York rulings.
This published opinion sits within the technology sector, where age-discrimination, non-compete, and whistleblower-retaliation claims appear frequently.
Claim Types
States
What these numbers mean
A case is one lawsuit, identified by its court and docket number. The docket is the running court record for that same case — it is not an extra case.
A published opinion or ruling is a written court decision. One case can produce several opinions, so opinion counts and case counts answer different questions. Only trusted, reportable opinions are used in the outcome statistics on this page.
Docket entries are the individual filings inside a case — motions, orders, scheduling notices. We read them to confirm a case is real and to see where it got to, but an entry is never counted as a case or as an outcome. A single case can generate hundreds of entries.
Far fewer opinions than cases is normal. Many employment cases settle privately or close without a published opinion. No opinion here does not mean the worker lost; it means this public record does not show a reportable result.
Everything on this page comes from public federal court records. Where we are not confident a record is accurate, we leave it out rather than guess.
Federal court cases
public court recordsOne row per court+docket case · written opinions stay grouped inside their case · plaintiff names redacted
Other Technology employers
Browse trusted published opinions involving similar workplaces.
Data sourced from public federal court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes extracted using AI analysis. This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The presence of an employer on this page does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.