Kapron v. Xing Yong Sheng Inc., et al
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)
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
Case No. 3:20-cv-1056-MMH-PDB
XING YONG SHENG, INC.,
d/b/a Crazy Sushi, et al.,
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.
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
In light of the foregoing, it is hereby
Case 3:20-cv-01056-MMH-PDB Document 44 Filed 09/07/21 Page 3 of 3 PageID 173
The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 42) is ADOPTED as
the opinion of the Court.
The Joint Motion to Approve FLSA Settlement and Dismiss With
Prejudice (Dkt. No. 32) is GRANTED.
This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
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.
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
Counsel of Record
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?