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)

Download PDF
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?