ORDER

SUSAN O. HICKEY, Chief District Judge.

Before the Court is the parties' Stipulation of Dismissal. (ECF No. 29). The Court finds that no response is necessary and that the matter is ripe for consideration.

On September 7, 2018, Plaintiff David Wright filed this putative class and collective action, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et seq., and the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act, Ark. Code Ann. §§ 11-4-201, et seq. On March 11, 2019, the parties filed the instant stipulation of dismissal, indicating that the parties have settled the matter and seeking to dismiss this case with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Generally, "[c]aselaw concerning stipulated dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) is clear that the entry of such a stipulation of dismissal is effective automatically and does not require judicial approval." Gardiner v. A.H. Robins Co., 747 F.2d 1180, 1189 (8th Cir. 1984). However, the Court nonetheless issues this order for clarity of the docket and due to the present case's nature as an FLSA case.

Several courts have held that settlement agreements resolving wage claims are subject to court approval to ensure that the parties are not negotiating around statutory minimum wages. See, e.g., Int'l Union, United Auto., Aerospace, and Agric. Implement Workers of Am. v. Gen. Motors Corp., 497 F.3d 615, 631 (6th Cir. 2007); Lynn's Food Stores, Inc. v. U.S., 679 F.2d 1350, 1353 (11th Cir. 1982); Cruthis v. Vision's, No. 4:12-CV-00244, 2014 WL 4092325 (E.D. Ark. Aug. 19, 2014). Other courts, including this Court, have held that court approval of an FLSA settlement is unnecessary when the lawsuit is not a collective action, all plaintiffs have been represented by counsel throughout the entirety of the case, and the parties wish for their agreement to remain private. See, e.g., Zeznanski v. First Step, Inc., No. 6:17-cv-6023-SOH (W.D. Ark. Oct. 5, 2017), ECF No. 25; Schneider v. Habitat for Humanity Int'l, Inc., No. 5:14-CV-5230-TLB, 2015 WL 500835, at *3 (W.D. Ark. Feb. 5, 2015).

This case has not been certified as a class or collective action and, thus, the case is being settled on an individual basis; Plaintiff has been represented by counsel throughout the course of this litigation; and although the parties do not state that they wish for their settlement to remain confidential, the Court presumes that the parties so desire because they have not requested judicial review of the settlement. Therefore, it appears to the Court that the settlement agreement in this case is of the type that does not require court approval. See Schneider, 2015 WL 500835, at *3. The parties have not submitted their settlement agreement for judicial review and the Court has not reviewed the parties' settlement agreement in this matter.

The Court now turns to the parties' request that this case be dismissed with prejudice. An action may be dismissed by "a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared." Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). Upon consideration, the Court finds that good cause has been shown for dismissal of the case. Accordingly, this case is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. If any party desires that the terms of settlement be a part of the record therein, those terms should be reduced to writing and filed with the Court within thirty (30) days of the entry of this judgment. The Court retains jurisdiction to vacate this Order and to reopen this action upon cause shown that the settlement has not been completed and further litigation is necessary.

IT IS SO ORDERED.