Igartua v. Polanco Brothers IP LLC

Background

On January 21, 2025, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not provide the agreement’s terms.

Court’s Orders

The court cancelled 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 may apply to reopen the case within 30 days. The application must show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the parties’ settlement. A request filed after 30 days, or without a showing of good cause, may be denied solely on that basis.

If the parties want the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, continuing authority—to enforce their settlement agreement, they must, within the same 30-day period, submit the settlement agreement in accordance with Rule 7.A of the court’s Individual Practices and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction.

Putative Class

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), the dismissal and any settlement operate only between Juan Igartua individually and Polanco Brothers IP LLC. They do not bind absent putative class members.

Classification and Effect

This was a procedural order disposing of the case after the parties reported an agreement in principle. The court did not decide the underlying claims on their merits. Judge Valerie Caproni entered the dismissal and directed that the case be closed, subject to the stated 30-day procedures.