Patton v. Larue Pest Management, Inc. et al
Filing
40
ORDER adopting 38 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 35 Joint MOTION for Settlement Approval filed by Keith Ruebeling, Larue Pest Management, Inc. The Report and Recommendation 38 is ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED and the findings incorpor ated herein. The parties' Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement and Dismissal of Action with Prejudice 35 is GRANTED, and their Settlement Agreement and Release of FLSA Claims is approved as a fair and reasonable resolution of this FLSA disp ute. Upon receipt of the settlement proceeds, Plaintiff's counsel must reimburse the Court for the $400.00 filing fee. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly, dismiss the case with prejudice, terminate all deadlines and motions, and close the file. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 10/24/2016. (LMF)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
RUSTY PATTON, on behalf of himself
and others similarly situated
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No: 2:16-cv-107-FtM-38MRM
LARUE PEST MANAGEMENT, INC.
and KEITH RUEBELING,
Defendants.
/
ORDER1
This matter comes before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Mac R.
McCoy’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. #38) filed on October 12, 2016. Judge
McCoy recommends granting the parties’ Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement and
Dismissal of Action With Prejudice (Doc. #35) and approving their Settlement Agreement
and Release of FLSA Claims as a fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute
under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. Because the parties
do not object to the Report and Recommendation (Doc. #39), this matter is ripe for review.
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. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Williams v. Wainwright,
1
Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These
hyperlinks are provided only for users’ convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in
CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse,
recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their
websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The
Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a
hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court.
681 F.2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982). 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, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge
reviews legal conclusions de novo even in the absence of an objection. See CooperHouston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).
After examining the file carefully and independently, and upon considering Judge
McCoy’s findings and recommendations, the Court accepts and adopts the Report and
Recommendation.
Accordingly, it is now ORDERED:
(1)
The Report and Recommendation (Doc. #38) is ACCEPTED AND
ADOPTED and the findings incorporated herein.
(2)
The parties’ Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement and Dismissal of Action
with Prejudice (Doc. #35) is GRANTED, and their Settlement Agreement and Release of
FLSA Claims is approved as a fair and reasonable resolution of this FLSA dispute.
(3)
Upon receipt of the settlement proceeds, Plaintiff’s counsel must reimburse
the Court for the $400.00 filing fee.
(4)
The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly, dismiss the
case with prejudice, terminate all deadlines and motions, and close the file.
DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 23rd day of October, 2016.
Copies: All Parties of Record
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?