Higgins v. U.S. Installation Group, Inc.

Filing 68

OPINION AND ORDER adopting 65 Report and Recommendations; granting 64 parties' Renewed Joint Motion for Judicial Approval of the Parties' Settlement Agreements and for Dismissal with Prejudice as to named Plaintiffs; denying as mo ot 30 plaintiffs Nevin Meyer and Stefan Meyer's Motion to Conditionally Certify a Collective Action; denying as moot 31 defendant's Motion to Stay Determination of Plaintiffs' Motion to Conditionally Certify Collective Action. The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing with prejudice all claims in this action by plaintiffs Nevin Meyer and Stefan Meyer. See Opinion and Order for details. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 9/20/2016. (AMB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
NEVIN MEYER, an individual,
and on behalf of all other
similarly
situated
individuals
and
STEFAN
MEYER, an individual, and on
behalf
of
all
other
similarly
situated
individuals,
Plaintiffs,
v.

Case No: 2:15-cv-583-FtM-99CM

U.S.
INSTALLATION
GROUP,
INC., a Florida corporation,
Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on consideration of the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. #65), filed
August 30, 2016, recommending that the Renewed Joint Motion for
Judicial Approval of the Parties' Settlement Agreements be granted
and the Settlement Agreements be approved as a fair and reasonable
resolution of a bona fide dispute under the FLSA.

No objections

have been filed and the time to do so has expired.
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings
and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify
the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.

28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982),

cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983).

In the absence of specific

objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review
factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9
(11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject or modify, in
whole or in part, the findings and recommendations.
636(b)(1)(C).

28 U.S.C. §

The district judge reviews legal conclusions de

novo, even in the absence of an objection.

See Cooper-Houston v.

Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro
Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993),
aff’d, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994) (Table).
After conducting an independent examination of the file and
upon due consideration of the Report and Recommendation, the Court
accepts the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1.

The

Report

and

Recommendation

(Doc.

#65)

is

hereby

adopted and the findings incorporated herein.
2.

The parties' Renewed Joint Motion for Judicial Approval

of the Parties' Settlement Agreements and for Dismissal with
Prejudice as to named Plaintiffs (Doc. #64) is granted and the
Settlement Agreement and General Release (Doc. #64-1, 64-2) is
approved as a fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide
dispute.

- 2 -

3.

The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing with prejudice

all claims asserted in this action by Plaintiffs Nevin Meyer and
Stefan Meyer.
4.

Plaintiffs Nevin Meyer and Stefan Meyer’s Motion to

Conditionally Certify a Collective Action Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §
216(B)

and

Motion

for

Equitable

Tolling

of

the

Statute

of

Limitations and Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Doc. #30) and
defendant’s Motion to Stay Determination of Plaintiffs’ Motion to
Conditionally Certify Collective Action (and for Equitable Tolling
of the Statute of Limitations) or, in the Alternative, Motion for
Extension of Time to File Response (Doc. #31) are denied as moot.
DONE and ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this __20th__ day of
September, 2016.

Copies:
Hon. Carol Mirando
United States Magistrate Judge
Counsel of Record
Unrepresented parties

- 3 -