Roblox Corporation v. WowWee Group Limited
- Susan Illston
- 3:22-cv-04476
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In Roblox v. WowWee, Judge Illston dismissed the settled case after the parties stipulated to dismissal and agreed the court would retain jurisdiction.
The case was dismissed for Roblox Corporation and WowWee Group Limited, WowWee Canada, Inc., WowWee USA, Inc., and Gramps Goods, Inc. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce their settlement agreement, and each party was responsible for its own attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses.
What happened
Roblox Corporation sued WowWee Group Limited, WowWee Canada, Inc., WowWee USA, Inc., and Gramps Goods, Inc. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or issues.
In Roblox Corporation v. WowWee Group Limited, the parties told the court they had reached a confidential settlement. They agreed that each side would pay its own attorneys’ fees and costs and that the court would retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.
Judge Susan Illston ordered that the court retain jurisdiction over the settlement agreement and that the case be dismissed. The parties’ stipulation provided for dismissal of all claims with prejudice once that order was entered.
The detailed version
- Roblox Corporation v. WowWee Group Limited · No. 3:22-cv-04476
- Susan Illston
- Nov. 12, 2024
Background
The filing identifies Roblox Corporation as the plaintiff and WowWee Group Limited, WowWee Canada, Inc., WowWee USA, Inc., and Gramps Goods, Inc. as the defendants. The provided text does not state what claims Roblox asserted or describe the underlying dispute.
Settlement and stipulation
The parties jointly reported that they had entered into a confidential settlement agreement. They stipulated that the court would retain jurisdiction to enforce that agreement and that each party would bear its own attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), they conditionally stipulated to dismissal of all claims with prejudice. The stipulation stated that this condition would take effect if the court entered the proposed order retaining jurisdiction over the settlement agreement.
Ruling
Judge Susan Illston entered the proposed order on November 12, 2024. The order stated that the court would retain jurisdiction over the settlement agreement and that, pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, the case was dismissed. The proposed-order text also stated that the action would be dismissed with prejudice upon entry of the order.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.