Lopez v. Narwal Robotics Corp.
Victor Lopez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Narwal Robotics Corp.
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:25-cv-06206
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Lopez v. Narwal Robotics Corp., Judge Abrams discontinued the case after a reported settlement, allowing restoration within 45 days.
Victor Lopez, Narwal Robotics Corp., and the other people Lopez sought to represent in the action.
What happened
Victor Lopez brought this case against Narwal Robotics Corp. on behalf of himself and others similarly situated. The court was told that the case had been settled in principle.
The court discontinued the action without costs to any party. It allowed either side to seek restoration of the case within 45 days; applications filed later may be denied solely because they were late. The court also stated that any request to retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement must place the settlement terms on the public record and obtain the court’s approval within that period.
Judge Ronnie Abrams ordered the Clerk of Court to close the case. The order did not discuss the underlying claims or decide their merits.
The detailed version
- Lopez v. Narwal Robotics Corp. · No. 1:25-cv-06206
- Ronnie Abrams
- Sept. 22, 2025
Background
The court stated that it had been informed that the case was settled in principle. The opinion does not describe the claims, the proposed settlement terms, or whether any settlement had received final approval.
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 was made within 45 days. Any application to reopen the action had to be filed within 45 days of the order; the court stated that an application filed later might be denied solely because it was late.
The court further stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, continuing 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 45-day period. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
Disposition
Judge Ronnie Abrams discontinued the action and directed that the case be closed. The order did not decide the underlying legal claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.