The Psychometrics Team, LLC v. BeiGene USA, Inc.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:24-cv-08960
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In The Psychometrics Team v. BeiGene, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled case without costs, allowing restoration within 30 days.
The Psychometrics Team, LLC, Daniel Serrano, and BeiGene USA, Inc.; the case was closed, subject to the order’s 30-day restoration and settlement-enforcement conditions.
What happened
The Psychometrics Team, LLC and Daniel Serrano sued BeiGene USA, Inc. The court was told that the case had been settled in principle.
The court discontinued the case without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s docket if an application was made within 30 days. The clerk was directed to close the case.
Judge Ronnie Abrams also stated that any request to reopen filed after 30 days could be denied solely because it was late. The court said that any request for it to retain authority to enforce a settlement had to place the settlement terms on the public record and receive the court’s approval within that same period.
The detailed version
- The Psychometrics Team, LLC v. BeiGene USA, Inc. · No. 1:24-cv-08960
- Ronnie Abrams
- Mar. 14, 2025
Background
The court stated that it had been informed that the case had been settled in principle. The opinion does not describe the claims, the settlement terms, or whether a final settlement agreement had been completed.
Ruling
The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s docket if an application to restore it was made within 30 days. The court further stated that any application to reopen filed after 30 days could be denied solely on that basis.
The court explained that, if the parties wanted the court to retain authority to enforce a settlement agreement, the agreement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Effect
This order ended the action on the court’s docket based on the reported settlement in principle; it did not decide the underlying claims. The order did not impose costs on either party and preserved the possibility of restoring the action if the stated deadline was met.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.