Aquino v. Mastec, Inc., et al

Filing 28

ORDER Adopting 27 Report and Recommendations on FLSA Settlement; granting 22 Joint Motion Requesting Order Approving Settlement Agreement and to Dismiss Lawsuit with Prejudice. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs and attorney's fees except as otherwise agreed. The Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the Settlement Agreement and General Release. Signed by Judge Cecilia M. Altonaga on 9/8/2020. See attached document for full details. (wc) Modified spacing on 9/8/2020 (wc).

Case 1:19-cv-23821-CMA Document 28 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/08/2020 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 19-23821-CIV-ALTONAGA/Goodman
BLAS RAMON AQUINO,
Plaintiff,
v.
MASTEC, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________/
ORDER
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Magistrate Judge Goodman’s Report and
Recommendations on FLSA Settlement [ECF No. 27], entered on September 2, 2020. The parties
seek approval of their Settlement Agreement and General Release (the “Agreement”) [ECF No.
22-1], 1 which includes a provision for the award of attorney’s fees. The Report recommends the
Court find “the parties’ settlement agreement is fair and reasonable, approve the settlement, and
dismiss this action with prejudice.” (Report 3). The Report also recommends the Court “reserve
jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the parties’ settlement, close the case, and deny all pending
motions as moot.” (Id. (bold omitted)). The parties did not object to the Report. The Court agrees
with the Report’s recommendations. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendations on FLSA Settlement [ECF No. 27] is ADOPTED.

1

The Agreement contains a confidentiality provision. (See Agreement ¶ 6). Where the Court must approve
a settlement, the agreement becomes a part of the judicial record, and therefore may not be deemed
confidential even if the parties so consent. See Jessup v. Luther, 277 F.3d 926, 929–30 (7th Cir. 2002).
Accordingly, parties may not submit a settlement agreement under seal or seek its review in camera unless
there is a compelling interest in secrecy. See id. at 928. While paragraph 6 of the Agreement seems to
indicate the parties seek to maintain the Agreement’s confidentiality, the parties did not file the Agreement
under seal, so it appears on the public docket.

Case 1:19-cv-23821-CMA Document 28 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/08/2020 Page 2 of 2
CASE NO. 19-23821-CIV-ALTONAGA/Goodman
The parties’ Joint Motion Requesting Order Approving Settlement Agreement and to
Dismiss Lawsuit with Prejudice [ECF No. 22] is GRANTED.
2. The Settlement Agreement and General Release [ECF No. 22-1] between Plaintiff,
Blas Ramon Aquino, and Defendants, MasTec, Inc., MasTec North America, Inc., and
MasTec Services Company, Inc., which has been duly filed as a record of the Court, is
APPROVED in its entirety.
3. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs and
attorney’s fees except as otherwise agreed.
4. All pending motions are DENIED as moot.
5. The Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the Settlement Agreement and
General Release
DONE AND ORDERED in Miami, Florida, this 8th day of September, 2020.

_________________________________
CECILIA M. ALTONAGA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
cc:

counsel of record

2