Spiro v. Eastman Chemical Company

- 1 -
No. 6:23-cv-00608
Sandra Spiro,
Plaintiff,
v.
Eastman Chemical Company,
Defendant.
O R D E R
Plaintiff brought this action under the Family Medical Leave
Act. Doc. 1. The case was referred to a magistrate judge. There-
after, the parties reached a settlement. Docs. 44, 45. The magis-
trate judge determined that the settlement agreement was valid
and enforceable and that defendant had satisfied its obligations
under the agreement. Docs. 44, 45. The magistrate judge then is-
sued a report recommending that the case be dismissed with prej-
udice in accordance with the settlement agreement because plain-
tiff refused to file dismissal documents. Doc. 45 at 2. Neither
party filed written objections.
When there have been no timely objections to a report, “the
court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face
of the record.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee’s notes
to 1983 amendment. Having reviewed the record and being satis-
fied that there is no clear error, the court accepts the report’s find-
ings and recommendations. Accordingly, the court dismisses this
action with prejudice. Any pending motions are denied as moot.
So ordered by the court on February 13, 2026.
J. CAM PB EL L BA RK ER
United States District Judge
Case 6:23-cv-00608-JCB-KNM Document 59 Filed 02/13/26 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:
<pageID>