Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 21, 2025

Tang Capital Partners, LP v. BRC Inc.

Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Docket
1:22-cv-03476
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Tang Capital Partners v. BRC Inc., Judge Lehrburger dismissed the settled case without costs, allowing reopening within thirty days if settlement was not completed.

Who this affects

Tang Capital Partners, LP and BRC Inc.; the order also terminated the pending motions and canceled the remaining case deadlines and conference dates.

What happened

Tang Capital Partners, LP sued BRC Inc., and the parties told the court that they had settled all claims in principle.

The court dismissed the case without costs, except as the settlement might provide. If the settlement was not completed within thirty days, either party could ask to reopen the case during that period.

Judge Robert W. Lehrburger also ruled that pending motions were moot, ended the remaining deadlines and conference dates, and directed the clerk to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Tang Capital Partners, LP v. BRC Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-03476
Judge
Robert Lehrburger
Date
July 21, 2025

Background

The parties advised the court that all claims in the action had been settled in principle. The opinion does not describe the claims or the terms of the proposed settlement.

Ruling

The court entered an order dismissing the action without costs, except as the parties might agree in their settlement. The dismissal was based on the parties' reported settlement rather than a decision on the merits of their claims.

The court allowed either party to apply by letter to restore the action to the calendar if the settlement was not consummated within thirty days of the order. Any request to reopen filed after that thirty-day period could be denied solely because it was late. If the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement, they had to file the agreement publicly and obtain a court order within the same thirty-day period.

The court ruled that all pending motions were moot and ordered them terminated. It also vacated the remaining conference dates and other deadlines and directed the clerk to close the case.

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.