Anderson v. Fix
- Thomas Hixson
- 3:24-cv-02658
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In Chloe Anderson v. Stitch Fix, Judge Hixson dismissed the settled action with prejudice under the parties’ stipulation.
Chloe Anderson and Stitch Fix, Inc.; the action was dismissed with prejudice, and each party bears its own costs and attorney’s fees.
What happened
Chloe Anderson v. Stitch Fix, Inc. and Does 1 through 10 began when Anderson sued Stitch Fix, Inc. The parties later reported that they had settled all of Anderson’s claims.
The case was originally filed in state court, removed to federal court, and sent to arbitration after Judge Thomas Hixson granted Stitch Fix’s request to compel arbitration. Anderson filed an arbitration demand, and the parties later signed a settlement agreement resolving her claims.
Judge Hixson ordered the action dismissed with prejudice based on the parties’ joint stipulation and directed the clerk to close the case. Each party must bear its own costs and attorney’s fees.
The detailed version
- Anderson v. Fix · No. 3:24-cv-02658
- Thomas Hixson
- Sept. 14, 2026
Background
Chloe Anderson sued Stitch Fix, Inc. and Does 1 through 10. The complaint was filed in state court on March 28, 2024, and Stitch Fix removed the case to the Northern District of California on May 2, 2024.
On June 18, 2024, Judge Hixson granted Stitch Fix’s petition to compel arbitration and directed the parties to provide joint status updates about the arbitration every 90 days. Anderson filed a demand for arbitration with JAMS on August 5, 2025.
Parties’ Stipulation
The parties told the court that they had fully executed a settlement agreement resolving Anderson’s claims. Through their attorneys, they jointly stipulated that the complaint and all claims for relief would be dismissed in their entirety, with prejudice. They also agreed that each party would bear its own costs and attorney’s fees.
Ruling
Judge Thomas S. Hixson ordered the action dismissed with prejudice in light of the parties’ stipulation. The court stated that the action was terminated under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A) and directed the clerk to close the case.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.