UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
JORGE MARTINEZ RODRIGUEZ,
Plaintiff,
v. 2:24-cv-1104-NPM
TORTILLERIA LA FRONTERA, INC., and
MARCO LERMA,
Defendants.
ORDER
In this Fair Labor Standards Act case, the parties have filed a Joint Stipulation
of Dismissal with Prejudice. (Doc. 18). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
41(a)(1)(A)(ii) allows a plaintiff to dismiss an action voluntarily if a stipulation of
dismissal is signed by all parties who have appeared. The dismissal is effective on
filing and requires no further action by the court. See Anago Franchising, Inc. v.
Shaz, LLC, 677 F.3d 1272, 1278 (11th Cir. 2012).
The text of the FLSA does not provide, and no Eleventh Circuit decision has
ever held, that FLSA claims are exempt from Rule 41. To the contrary, the Eleventh
Circuit has reasoned that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure apply “in actions
brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act no less than in any other case.”
Vasconcelo v. Miami Auto Max, Inc., 981 F.3d 934, 942 (11th Cir. 2020); see also
Casso-Lopez v. Beach Time Rental Suncoast, LLC, 335 F.R.D. 458, 461-462 (M.D.
Fla. 2020) (holding parties may terminate an FLSA case by filing either a Rule 41
stipulation of dismissal with prejudice or a Rule 68(a) notice of acceptance of an
offer of judgment “and the district court is immediately powerless to interfere’);
Dicomo v. KJIMS Dev. Co., Inc., No. 2:16-cv-327-FtM-99CM, 2016 WL 6678420,
*] (M.D. Fla. Nov. 14, 2016) (“[T]he parties may dismiss [an FLSA] case in its
entirety pursuant to the Joint Stipulation for Dismissal With Prejudice without
further action from the Court as it is unconditional and self-executing.”’).
Accordingly, this action is dismissed with prejudice. Each party shall bear its
own fees and costs. The clerk of court is directed to deny all pending motions,
terminate all scheduled events, and close the case.
ORDERED on March 21, 2025
NICHOLAS P. LE
United States Magistrate Judge
-2-
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.