Kapron v. Xing Yong Sheng Inc., et al

Filing 44

ORDER adopting 42 Report and Recommendation; granting 32 Joint Motion to Approve FLSA Settlement and Dismiss With Prejudice; approving settlement; dismissing case with prejudice; directing the Clerk of the Court to enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close the case. Signed by Judge Marcia Morales Howard on 9/7/2021. (JW)

Download PDF
Case 3:20-cv-01056-MMH-PDB Document 44 Filed 09/07/21 Page 1 of 3 PageID 171 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION JONATHAN KAPRON, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 3:20-cv-1056-MMH-PDB XING YONG SHENG, INC., d/b/a Crazy Sushi, et al., Defendants. ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 42; Report) entered by the Honorable Patricia D. Barksdale, United States Magistrate Judge, on September 1, 2021. In the Report, Judge Barksdale recommends that the Joint Motion to Approve FLSA Settlement and Dismiss With Prejudice (Dkt. No. 32; Motion) be granted, the settlement be approved, the case be dismissed with prejudice; and judgment be entered in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants. See Report at 9. The parties have no objections to the Report and Recommendation. See Joint Notice of the Parties Having No Objection to Report & Recommendation (ECF 42) (Dkt. No. 43). Case 3:20-cv-01056-MMH-PDB Document 44 Filed 09/07/21 Page 2 of 3 PageID 172 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 Defendants for unpaid minimum wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. (FLSA). See First Amended Complaint for Damages and Jury Trial Demanded (Dkt. No. 9). Thereafter, the parties engaged in settlement negotiations, which resulted in a resolution of the issues and claims raised in this case. See generally Motion. Upon review of the record, including the Report and Motion, the undersigned concludes that the settlement represents a “reasonable and fair” resolution of Plaintiff’s claims. Accordingly, the Court will accept and adopt the Report. In light of the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED: -2- Case 3:20-cv-01056-MMH-PDB Document 44 Filed 09/07/21 Page 3 of 3 PageID 173 1. The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 42) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court. 2. The Joint Motion to Approve FLSA Settlement and Dismiss With Prejudice (Dkt. No. 32) is GRANTED. 3. For purposes of satisfying the FLSA, the settlement is APPROVED. 4. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants for $7,249.56 as wages and liquidated damages, and $15,750.44 for attorney’s fees and costs. 6. The Clerk of the Court is further directed to terminate any pending motions or deadlines as moot and close this file. DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida this 7th day of September, 2021. ja Copies to: Counsel of Record -3-

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?