Opinion
Case No: 2:14-cv-161-FtM-29CM
08-03-2015
RAMON SALAZAR VASQUEZ, PORFIRIO AGUILAR FABIAN, ERNESTO AGUILAR BOCANEGRA, MACODONIO AMBROCIO MATIAS, FILIBERTO BAUTISTA, JOSUE CARRILLO ORTIZ, AGUSTIN CRISTEN TEJEDA, LUIS ALBERTO CRUZ VASQUEZ, PEDRO CRUZ VASQUEZ, JOSE ALBERTO GARCIA RODRIGUEZ, ESTEBAN GONZALEZ MARQUES, GUSTAVO GONZALEZ MARTINEZ, FERNANDO GONZALEZ PEREZ, ISAAC GONZALEZ TREJO, FELICIANO LOPEZ CRUZ, MIGUEL MACIAS DELUNA, RENE MARTINEZ MARTINEZ, ANTONIO MENDEZ GARCIA, MARCOS MARQUEZ MAR, BONIFACIO MARQUEZ MARQUEZ, ROBERTO CARLOS MARQUEZ, CLAUDIO SERAFIN MARTINEZ, GIOVANNI SERAFIN MARTINEZ, FRANCISCO OSARIO DEL ANGEL, SAUL PEREZ MENDEZ, FRANCISCO BRUNO PERIANEZ, JOSE RAMOS RAMOS, CANDIDO RAMIREZ ORTEGA, FELIPE REYES SALVADOR, BERTIN ROJAS LOPEZ, MELITON SALAZAR RODRIGUEZ, UZIEL SANTIAGO MARTINEZ, JAVIER VASQUEZ HERNANDEZ, and RICARDO VITE XOTHIHUA, Plaintiffs, v. P & L HARVESTING, LLC, Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #47), filed July 13, 2015, recommending that the Joint Amended Motion for Approval of Amended Settlement Agreement and Release and for Dismissal With Prejudice (Doc. #46) be granted, the request to retain jurisdiction be denied, and the case be dismissed with prejudice. No objections have been filed and the time to do so has expired.
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. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983). 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 Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff'd, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994) (Table).
After conducting an independent examination of the file and upon due consideration of the Report and Recommendation, the Court accepts the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge that the settlement was a fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Court further agrees that the undersigned need not retain jurisdiction over the enforcement of the Amended Settlement Agreement and Release of Claims.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. #47) is hereby adopted and the findings incorporated herein.
2. The parties' Joint Amended Motion for Approval of Amended Settlement Agreement and Release and for Dismissal With Prejudice (Doc. #46) is granted, with the exception of the request on page 3 for the Court to retain jurisdiction, and the Amended Settlement Agreement and Release of Claims (Doc. #46, p. 9) is approved as a fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute.
3. The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing the case with prejudice, terminate all deadlines and motions, and close the file.
DONE and ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this 3rd day of August, 2015.
/s/_________
JOHN E. STEELE
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies:
Hon. Carol Mirando
United States Magistrate Judge
Counsel of Record
Unrepresented parties