Gibson v. M.T. Productions in Jacksonville, Inc.,

Filing 34

ORDER AND STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT adopting 32 Report and Recommendation; granting 31 Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement. This case is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the file. Signed by Judge Marcia Morales Howard on 11/3/2016. (JW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION
CYNTHIA M. GIBSON,
Plaintiff,
vs.

Case No. 3:16-cv-232-J-34JRK

M.T. PRODUCTIONS IN JACKSONVILLE, INC.,
d/b/a Thee Officers Club,
Defendant.
_____________________________________/

ORDER AND STIPULATED FINAL JUDGMENT

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Magistrate Judge James R. Klindt’s Report and
Recommendation (Dkt. No. 32; Report), entered on October 27, 2016, recommending that
the Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement (Dkt. No. 31; Motion) be granted to the extent
that the Court enter an Order and Stipulated Final Judgment approving the parties’
settlement agreement, and that this case be dismissed with prejudice. See Report at 4. On
November 1, 2016, the parties filed a notice advising the Court that they do not have any
objection to the Report. See Joint Stipulation of Non-Objection to Court’s Report and
Recommendation Dated October 27, 2016 (Dkt. No. 33; Stipulation).
The Court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). If no specific
objections to findings of facts are filed, the district court is not required to conduct a de novo
review of those findings. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993); see
also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, the district court must review legal conclusions de

novo. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); United
States v. Rice, No. 2:07-mc-8-FtM-29SPC, 2007 WL 1428615, at * 1 (M.D. Fla. May 14,
2007).
The Court has conducted an independent examination of the record in this case and
a de novo review of the legal conclusions. Plaintiff filed suit against Defendant pursuant to
the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. (FLSA), seeking recovery of unpaid
overtime compensation. See Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 24). Thereafter, the parties
engaged in settlement negotiations, which resulted in a resolution of the issues and claims
raised in this case. See Motion (Dkt. No. 31). Upon review of the record, including the
Report, Motion, and settlement agreement, the undersigned concludes that the settlement
represents a “reasonable and fair” resolution of Plaintiff’s FLSA claims. Accordingly, the
Court will accept and adopt Judge Klindt’s Report.
In light of the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED:
1.

Magistrate Judge James R. Klindt’s Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 32)

is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
2.

The Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement (Dkt. No. 31) is GRANTED to the

extent the Court enters this Order and Stipulated Final Judgment.
3.

For purposes of satisfying the FLSA, the settlement agreement is APPROVED.

4.

This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

-2-

5.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to terminate any pending motions or

deadlines as moot and close this file.
DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida, this 3rd day of November, 2016.

ja
Copies to:
Counsel of Record

-3-