Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 7, 2025

Isakov v. Sushi Nakazawa, LLC

Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Docket
1:24-cv-09488
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Isakov v. Sushi Nakazawa, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled action without costs and without prejudice to timely restoration.

Who this affects

Simon Isakov, the putative class members identified in the caption, and Sushi Nakazawa, LLC; the case was closed after the court was informed that it had settled.

What happened

In Isakov v. Sushi Nakazawa, LLC, the court was informed that the parties had settled the case.

The court discontinued the action without costs to either party and without prejudice to restoring it if an application is made within 45 days. The court also directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

Judge Ronnie Abrams stated that any request for the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement must place the settlement terms on the public record and obtain the court’s approval within the same 45-day period.

The detailed version

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

Case
Isakov v. Sushi Nakazawa, LLC · No. 1:24-cv-09488
Judge
Ronnie Abrams
Date
Apr. 7, 2025

Background The opinion states that the Court was informed that the case had been settled. It does not describe the settlement’s terms or resolve the underlying claims.

Order 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 is made within 45 days. Any application to reopen filed after that period may be denied solely because it was late.

The court further stated that, if the parties want the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement, the agreement’s terms must be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 45-day period. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

Effect The order ended the case on the court’s docket based on the reported settlement, while preserving a limited opportunity to seek restoration within 45 days. The opinion does not state whether the court retained jurisdiction or disclose the settlement terms.

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.