Competello v. SoulFlora Inc.

Background

On December 2, 2024, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not state the settlement’s terms.

Court’s Orders

The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.

The parties were allowed to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement. The court also stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction—legal authority—to enforce the settlement agreement, they had to submit the agreement and request an order expressly retaining that authority within the same 30-day period.

Class-Action Effect

The court directed the Clerk to remove the phrase “individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated” from the caption. Because the parties had not notified the court that they intended to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), which governs certain class-action settlements and dismissals, the dismissal and any settlement applied only between the individual plaintiff and the defendant. They did not bind absent putative class members.

Disposition

The case was dismissed with prejudice and without costs, and the Clerk was directed to close it. The order did not decide the underlying claims on their merits; it disposed of the case after the parties reported an agreement in principle.