Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 10, 2025

VOGT v. Publicis Groupe

Judge
Valerie Caproni
Docket
1:24-cv-06904
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Vogt v. Publicis Groupe, Judge Caproni dismissed the settled case with prejudice and without costs, while allowing possible reopening within 30 days.

Who this affects

Jacob Vogt and the defendants—Publicis Groupe, Publicis USA Production Solutions, Inc. doing business as PXP Studios, and Bartle Bogle Hegarty—were affected by the dismissal, which ended the case after their settlement.

What happened

In Vogt v. Publicis Groupe, the court was told that the parties had reached an agreement on all issues through the magistrate judge.

The court canceled all scheduled conferences and deadlines, dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs or attorneys’ fees to either party, terminated the pending motions, and closed the case.

Judge Caproni allowed the parties to seek reopening within 30 days if they showed good cause. The parties could also ask the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce their settlement by submitting the agreement and a proper request within that period.

The detailed version

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

Case
VOGT v. Publicis Groupe · No. 1:24-cv-06904
Judge
Valerie Caproni
Date
July 10, 2025

Background

On July 9, 2025, the court was notified that the parties had reached an agreement on all issues through the magistrate judge. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the settlement’s terms.

Order

The court canceled 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 were permitted to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Any such application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the settlement. The court stated that a request filed after 30 days, or without a showing of good cause, could be denied on that basis alone.

The court also stated that, if the parties wanted it to retain jurisdiction—the power to enforce the settlement agreement—they had to submit the settlement agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, terminated the open motions, and closed the case. The order also provided a 30-day procedure for seeking reopening or asking the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.