Blanco Bonilla v. CSI Aviation Class Action
This case was recently filed and is being litigated — the claims below are allegations, not proven facts, and there is no settlement, claim form, or payout yet. Watch the case (right) and we'll email you when it moves, including if it settles and a claim process opens.
What happened
A proposed class action filed against CSI Aviation, Inc. The specific allegations cannot be determined from the available docket information, but the case appears to potentially concern employment-related claims given CSI Aviation's operations in the aviation services industry.
Do you qualify?
No settlement exists yet, so there is nothing to file and no class definition to check. If the case settles, the settlement will define exactly who qualifies — watch this case and we'll let you know.
How to file
There is no claim to file yet. If this case reaches a settlement, a claim process will open — usually with an official settlement website and a filing deadline.
Common questions
- Can I file a claim in the Blanco Bonilla v. CSI Aviation Class Action case?
- No. This case has been filed and is still being litigated — there is no settlement, no claim form, and no payout. Many class actions are dismissed or never certified, so a case being filed does not mean anyone will be paid. If it settles and a claim process opens, that will be announced by a court-appointed settlement administrator.
- Where is the Blanco Bonilla v. CSI Aviation Class Action case being heard?
- The case is before the District Court, District of Columbia, case number 1:26-cv-02511. Everything alleged in the complaint is an allegation, not a proven fact.
New to class actions?
This summary was generated from public settlement documents and may contain errors. Confirm eligibility, deadlines, and payment terms on the official settlement website before filing. ClaimWatch is not a law firm and this is not legal advice. Filing a claim is free.
More employment settlements
View all →Skin Spirit Essential Wage and Hour Settlement
SkinSpirit Essential allegedly violated California wage and hour laws by improperly compensating non-exempt employees. The company is settling claims for wage violations during the class period and penalty claims under California's Private Attorney General Act.
Petzing v. The Seven Motor Corporation Employment Application Settlement
The Seven Motor Corporation allegedly failed to disclose the wage scale or salary range in its job postings for open positions in Washington. The defendant disputes the claims and contends it has not violated any law.
Up to $2,172.30
EEOC v. Meathead Movers Age Discrimination Settlement
The EEOC alleged that Meathead Movers, Inc. violated the Age Discrimination in Employment Act by engaging in age discrimination in hiring and recruitment since at least 2017. The company was accused of discriminating against job applicants based on their age. Meathead Movers agreed to settle these claims through a court-approved Consent Decree on October 14, 2025.
Up to $2 million total to be distributed among eligible class members
Hill v. Delphinus Engineering Inc. Settlement
Delphinus Engineering Inc. allegedly failed to disclose wage scales, salary ranges, and general descriptions of benefits and other compensation in job postings for open positions in Washington. The defendant disputes the claims and denies any violation of law.
The settlement fund ranges from $1,802,386.04 to $2,745,000.00 depending on the number of claims submitted.