UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ARISMENDI MARTINEZ, Plaintiff, v. 24-CV-9158 (DEH) MORRIS 1 LLC, el al., ORDER Defendants.

DALE E. HO, United States District Judge: In this action, Plaintiff Arismendi Martinez seeks relief for alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law against Defendants Morris 1 LLC and Chesnut Holdings of New York, Inc.. An order issued December 6, 2024, referred this case to Magistrate Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky for general pretrial management and dispositive motions. See ECF No. 6. On July 28, 2025, the parties filed a joint letter motion seeking approval of their settlement of Plaintiff's claims. See ECF No. 30. On August 29, 2025, Judge Tarnofsky issued a Report and Recommendation (the “Report”), recommending that the settlement be approved. See ECF No. 33. The parties had until September 12, 2025 at the latest, to file any objections to the Report. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) (giving parties fourteen days to file written objections). No objections were filed. In reviewing a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, a district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

(b)(1)(C). “In a case such as this one, where no timely objection has been made, a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.”

Kuan v. Notoriety Grp. LLC, No. 22 Civ. 1583,

, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. June 9, 2023). The Court has reviewed the Report and has found no error, clear or otherwise. It is hereby ORDERED that the Report is ADOPTED IN FULL. The settlement agreement is APPROVED as fair and reasonable based on the nature and scope of Plaintiffs claims and the risks and expenses involved in additional litigation. It is further ORDERED that Plaintiff's counsel’s request for attorneys’ fees and costs is GRANTED.

The Court having been advised at ECF No. 30-1 that all claims asserted herein have been settled by a fully executed Settlement agreement, it is ORDERED that the above-entitled action be and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice to the right to reopen the action within thirty days of the date of this Order if the settlement is not consummated. To be clear, any application to reopen must be filed by the aforementioned deadline; any application to reopen filed thereafter may be denied solely on that basis. Further, requests to extend the deadline to reopen are unlikely to be granted. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close the motion at ECF No. 30. SO ORDERED. Dated: October 23, 2025 New York, New York

DALEE.HO-” United States District Judge