Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 11, 2025

Fernandez v. Groupe SEB USA

Judge
Vyskocil
Docket
1:25-cv-01848
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureClass Action
In one sentence

In Fernandez v. Groupe SEB USA, Judge Vyskocil discontinued the action after the parties reported a settlement in principle, subject to stated restoration deadlines.

Who this affects

Felipe Fernandez, Groupe SEB USA, and the people Fernandez identified as others similarly situated were affected by the discontinuance and the July 7, 2025 deadline for seeking restoration.

What happened

In Fernandez v. Groupe SEB USA, Felipe Fernandez told the court that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. Fernandez brought the action on behalf of himself and others similarly situated.

The court discontinued the action without costs to any party and allowed it to be restored if the parties could not put their settlement in writing and applied by July 7, 2025. If no such application was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice.

Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil also adjourned all other dates and deadlines indefinitely. The order was entered on June 11, 2025.

The detailed version

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

Case
Fernandez v. Groupe SEB USA · No. 1:25-cv-01848
Judge
Vyskocil
Date
June 11, 2025

Background

Felipe Fernandez brought this action on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated against Groupe SEB USA. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims. Fernandez sent the court a letter stating that the parties had reached a settlement in principle.

Court’s Order

The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party. The action could be restored to the court’s calendar if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing and an application to restore the action was made by July 7, 2025.

The court further ordered that, if no application to restore the action was made by July 7, 2025, the dismissal would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not be brought again. All other dates and deadlines were adjourned indefinitely. The order did not decide the underlying claims.

Disposition

The action was discontinued under the stated settlement conditions. Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil entered the order on June 11, 2025.

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.