Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 15, 2025

Minden Pictures, Inc. v. Yardzen, Inc.

Judge
Nathanael Cousins
Docket
5:24-cv-07387
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Minden Pictures v. Yardzen, Judge Cousins conditionally dismissed the settled action with prejudice and allowed reopening within 45 days.

Who this affects

Minden Pictures, Inc. and Yardzen, Inc.; the action and all claims asserted in it were dismissed with prejudice.

What happened

Minden Pictures, Inc. v. Yardzen, Inc. was dismissed after the court was notified that the parties had settled and no issue remained for the court to decide.

The opinion does not describe the claims or the settlement terms. It states that the case and all asserted claims were dismissed with prejudice, meaning they cannot be brought again in this action.

Judge Nathanael M. Cousins directed the clerk to close the case administratively, vacated all scheduled dates, and retained jurisdiction for 45 days. Either party could move to reopen the case during that period.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Minden Pictures, Inc. v. Yardzen, Inc. · No. 5:24-cv-07387
Judge
Nathanael Cousins
Date
Jan. 15, 2025

Background

The court was notified that the action had settled. The opinion states that no issue remained for the court to determine. It does not provide the claims asserted or the settlement terms.

Ruling

The court ordered a conditional dismissal. It dismissed the action and all claims asserted in it with prejudice. The clerk was directed to administratively close the case, and all scheduled dates were vacated.

The court retained jurisdiction for 45 days. During that period, either party could move to reopen the case, provided the motion was filed within 45 days.

Effect

The order ended the action based on the reported settlement and barred refiling the dismissed claims in this action because the dismissal was with prejudice. The opinion does not state any other terms of the settlement.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.