United States District Court, E.D. New York
February 5, 2015
ERNESTO BODON, KEVIN CURRY & DONNA ANNUNZIATO, Plaintiffs,
DOMINO'S PIZZA, INC., Defendants.
SANDRA L. TOWNES, District Judge.
In this New York Labor Law class action, plaintiffs Kevin Curry and Donna Annuziato (collectively, "plaintiffs") reached an agreement with defendant Domino's Pizza LLC ("Domino's"). This Court referred plaintiff's unopposed motion seeking final approval of the settlement agreement and related relief to Magistrate Judge Roanne L. Mann. Now before the Court is Judge Mann's January 16, 2015 thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation, which finds that the proposed settlement in this matter is procedurally and substantively fair and recommends: (1) that this Court grant final approval of the settlement and direct distribution of settlement proceeds in accordance with the settlement agreement, (2) enter the parties' Proposed Final Judgment and Order, with certain modifications [Dkt. No. 207-1], and (3) dismiss plaintiffs' claims with prejudice, except retaining jurisdiction over the pending fee dispute.
Within fourteen days of service of a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation, any party may file written objections. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Where, as here, there have been no objections, the Court is not required to review the factual or legal conclusions of a magistrate judge. See Thomas v. Am, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). In addition, failure to file timely objections may waive the right to appeal the district court's order. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Small v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 892 F.2d 15, 16 (2d cir. 1989).
Judge Mann's January 16, 2015 Report and Recommendation is affirmed and adopted. Plaintiffs' unopposed motion for final approval of the terms of the settlement agreement and related relief is granted and the Court directs distribution of settlement proceeds in accordance with the settlement agreement. The parties' Proposed Final Judgment and Order, as modified by Judge Mann, is entered and plaintiffs' claims are dismissed with prejudice. The Court retains jurisdiction over the pending fee dispute, which is respectfully referred, to Judge Mann.