UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

ESTEBAN RAMIREZ,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 2:21-cv-307-SPC-NPM

DIVISION 16, LLC,

Defendant. / ORDER1 Before the Court is United States Magistrate Judge Mac R. McCoy’s Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 50). Judge McCoy recommends granting in part and denying in part the Joint Motion for Order Approving Resolution of FLSA Claim (Doc. 49) and approving in part the Settlement Agreement (Doc. 49-1). No party objected, so the matter is ripe for review. After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part,” the magistrate judge’s R&R.

(b)(1)(C). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review the

1 Disclaimer: Documents hyperlinked to CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By using hyperlinks, the Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide, nor does it have any agreements with them. The Court is also not responsible for a hyperlink’s availability and functionality, and a failed hyperlink does not affect this Order. R&R de novo. See Garvey v. Vaughn,

, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993). Instead, when parties don’t object, a district court need only correct plain error

as demanded by the interests of justice. See, e.g., Symonette v. V.A. Leasing Corp.,

(11th Cir. 2016); Thomas v. Arn,

(1985). Plain error exists if (1) “an error occurred”; (2) “the error was plain”; (3) “it affected substantial rights”; and (4) “not correcting the error

would seriously affect the fairness of the judicial proceedings.” Farley v. Nationwide Mut. Ins.,

, 1329 (11th Cir. 1999). After careful consideration and an independent review of the case, the Court finds no plain error. It thus accepts and adopts the Report and

Recommendation (Doc. 50) in full. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 50) is ACCEPTED and

ADOPTED and the findings incorporated herein. 2. The Joint Motion for Order Approving Resolution of FLSA Claim (Doc. 49) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows: a. The portion of the amendment provision in the Settlement

Agreement that purports to allow the parties to modify the agreement without Court approval (see Doc. 49-1 at 7-8 ¶ 17) is invalid and severed from the agreement; and b. The remainder of the settlement agreement (Doc. 49-1) is approved as a fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute regarding Plaintiff's FLSA claims. 3. This action is DISMISSED with prejudice. 4. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment, terminate any pending motions or deadlines, and close the case. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on July 7, 2022.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies: All Parties of Record