Duffey v. Surfside Coffee Company, LLC et al, No. 2:2020cv00501 - Document 36 (M.D. Fla. 2021)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER denying without prejudice 34 Motion for Approval of Settlement and for Dismissal; adopting 35 Report and Recommendations. The parties shall elect an option on or before August 30, 2021. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 7/23/2021. (RKR)

Download PDF
Duffey v. Surfside Coffee Company, LLC et al Doc. 36 Case 2:20-cv-00501-JES-MRM Document 36 Filed 07/23/21 Page 1 of 3 PageID 112 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION THERESA DUFFEY, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Case No: 2:20-cv-501-JES-MRM SURFSIDE COFFEE COMPANY, LLC, a foreign limited liability company and CHRISTOPHER MELLGREN, individually, Defendants. OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on consideration of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. #35), filed July 6, 2021, recommending that the parties' Joint Motion for Judicial Approval of the Parties' Settlement Agreement, and for Dismissal With Prejudice (Doc. #34) be denied without 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. 636(b)(1); 28 U.S.C. § 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 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:20-cv-00501-JES-MRM Document 36 Filed 07/23/21 Page 2 of 3 PageID 113 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. 636(b)(1). 28 U.S.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. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. #35) is hereby adopted and the findings incorporated herein. 2. The parties' Joint Motion for Judicial Approval of the Parties' Settlement Agreement, and for Dismissal With Prejudice (Doc. #34) is DENIED without prejudice to electing one of the following options on or before August 30, 2021: A. File an amended joint motion to approve a settlement agreement that adequately addresses the issues identified in the Report and Recommendation and file a fully executed settlement agreement that is binding on relevant parties if approved by the Court; or - 2 - Case 2:20-cv-00501-JES-MRM Document 36 Filed 07/23/21 Page 3 of 3 PageID 114 B. File a notice of their intent to litigate this action so that this case may be reset for a Preliminary Pretrial Conference. DONE and ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this of July 2021. Copies: Hon. Mac R. McCoy United States Magistrate Judge Counsel of Record Unrepresented parties - 3 - 23rd day

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.