Kebatta v. Pencil
- Tarnofsky
- 1:25-cv-01882
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Tracy Kebatta v. Pencil, Judge Tarnofsky discontinued the action after a settlement in principle, allowing restoration by November 6, 2025.
The parties to the action: Tracy Kebatta and Pencil, Inc., et al.
What happened
In Tracy Kebatta v. Pencil, Inc., et al., the court was informed that the parties had reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or settlement terms.
The court discontinued the action without costs to any party. It allowed either party to seek restoration of the action to the court’s calendar if the parties could not put their settlement in writing, provided the application was made by November 6, 2025.
Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky ordered that if no application to restore the action was made by that date, the dismissal would be with prejudice. The court did not decide the underlying merits.
The detailed version
- Kebatta v. Pencil · No. 1:25-cv-01882
- Tarnofsky
- Oct. 7, 2025
Background
The court stated that it had been informed that the parties reached a settlement in principle. The opinion does not identify the claims asserted or provide the settlement’s terms.
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 calendar if the parties were unable to memorialize their settlement in writing. Any application to restore the action had to be made by November 6, 2025.
The court further ordered that if no application to restore was made by that date, the dismissal of the action would be with prejudice, meaning the action could not then be refiled. Judge Robyn F. Tarnofsky entered the order on October 7, 2025. The order did not resolve the underlying legal claims on their merits.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.