ORDER

PHILIP R. LAMMENS, Magistrate Judge.

This Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") matter is before the Court on the parties' joint motion for approval of settlement.1 (Doc. 17). The Court must determine whether the settlement between Plaintiff, Karen Drake, and Defendant, Central Florida Gaming, LLC, is a "fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute" over Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) issues. See Lynn's Food Stores, Inc. v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1354-55 (11th Cir. 1982).

I. Legal Standards

If a settlement is not one supervised by the Department of Labor, the only other route for compromise of FLSA claims is provided in the context of suits brought directly by employees against their employer under section 216(b) to recover back wages for FLSA violations. "When employees bring a private action for back wages under the FLSA, and present to the district court a proposed settlement, the district court may enter a stipulated judgment after scrutinizing the settlement for fairness." 679 F.2d at 1353.

The Eleventh Circuit has held that "[s]ettlements may be permissible in the context of a suit brought by employees under the FLSA for back wages because initiation of the action by the employees provides some assurance of an adversarial context." Id. at 1354. In adversarial cases:

Id.

II. Discussion

The parties participated in a settlement conference on October 23, 2018 and agreed to resolve their claims by settlement. (Doc. 17). Defendant will pay a total of $21,600, which includes 1) $400 for Plaintiff's illegal tip pool claim, 2) $17,500 for her retaliation claim, and 3) $3,500 in attorney's fees and costs. In addition, the parties negotiated a separate release of all additional claims not currently pending for $100 and a confidentiality agreement for $100. (Doc. 17-1).

The parties were represented by experienced counsel, and both the terms and conditions of the parties' settlement were the subject of arms-length negotiations between counsel. The settlement amount was based on information learned through the exchange of Plaintiff's statement of claim, pay records, and time records. The parties have determined that it is in their respective best interest to conclude the dispute and issues alleged by a fair, full and complete payment and satisfaction of the claims of Plaintiff, without continuing this lawsuit. The parties agree that that the settlement is fair and reasonable.

With respect to the agreed-to sum for attorney's fee and costs, the parties represent that they were negotiated separately from Plaintiff's recovery. See Bonetti v. Embarq Mgmt.Co., Case No. 6:07-cv-1335, 2009 WL 2371407 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 4, 2009). Under the circumstances, I submit that the amount of $3,500 for attorney's fees and costs appears to be reasonable.2

Finally, with respect to the release of non-FLSA claims, the Court finds persuasive other cases from around the district that approve of such general releases where the release is supported by separate consideration and does not diminish plaintiff's recovery on the FLSA claims. See, e.g., Middleton v. Sonic Brands, LLC, No. 6:13-cv-386, 2013 WL 4854767, at *3 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 10, 2013) (approving of separate release supported by $100 in consideration and citing additional cases). Because Plaintiff received a reasonable settlement of her FLSA claims and because the general release is supported by separate, adequate consideration, the release of claims not pending does not render the agreement unfair.

III. CONCLUSION

Accordingly, the joint motion to approve the settlement agreement is GRANTED. The settlement agreement is APPROVED; and this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. The clerk is DIRECTED to close the case.

DONE and ORDERED.