Chong's Produce, Inc. v. Queen Fresh Fruits, LLC
- Nathanael Cousins
- 5:19-cv-01610
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 4
In Chong’s Produce v. Queen Fresh Fruits, Judge Cousins dismissed the settled case without prejudice, conditioned on settlement compliance, while retaining enforcement jurisdiction.
Chong’s Produce, Inc., Queen Fresh Fruits, LLC, and Queen Kho Bo, LLC were affected by the dismissal and settlement-compliance requirement. The court also retained jurisdiction to enforce a separate confidential agreement involving non-party Lam Thanh Le.
What happened
Chong’s Produce, Inc. v. Queen Fresh Fruits, LLC involved claims under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act and state contract law. The parties reached confidential settlement agreements after default proceedings and settlement efforts.
The court dismissed the case without prejudice, subject to the parties’ compliance with their confidential settlement agreements. It retained jurisdiction only to enforce those agreements and did not decide the underlying claims.
Judge Nathanael M. Cousins entered the conditional dismissal order on February 27, 2020. The order also stated that any request to file the agreements under seal would need to follow the court’s local rules.
The detailed version
- Chong's Produce, Inc. v. Queen Fresh Fruits, LLC · No. 5:19-cv-01610
- Nathanael Cousins
- Feb. 27, 2020
Background
Chong’s Produce, Inc. sued Queen Fresh Fruits, LLC and Queen Kho Bo, LLC in the Northern District of California. The complaint sought to enforce alleged rights under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act of 1930 and alleged state-law breach-of-contract rights.
The defendants did not file a pleading, and the clerk entered default. Chong’s Produce then requested a default judgment. At two hearings, Lam Thanh Le, identified as the defendants’ manager and owner but not a party to the lawsuit, appeared. Because the defendants were limited liability companies, the order states that Le could not represent them without a lawyer.
Before ruling on the default-judgment request, the court appointed limited-scope settlement counsel for the defendants and ordered a settlement conference. The parties and their settlement attorneys attended a conference on December 6, 2019, before Magistrate Judge Virginia DeMarchi. Le also attended.
Settlement and requested dismissal
The parties documented their settlement in a written Confidential Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release. Chong’s Produce and Le also entered into a separate confidential agreement related to the parties’ settlement. The parties agreed that each side would pay its own attorney’s fees and costs incurred to that point.
The parties jointly requested a conditional dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(i). They asked the court to dismiss the action without prejudice while retaining jurisdiction to enforce the confidential settlement agreements.
Ruling
The court ordered that the action be dismissed without prejudice, subject to the parties’ compliance with the Confidential Settlement Agreement and Mutual Release. The court directed the parties to comply with that agreement.
The court retained jurisdiction solely to enforce the confidential settlement agreements reached between the parties and Lam Thanh Le. The order did not decide the underlying agricultural-commodities or contract claims.
The court stated that a party seeking enforcement could request to file relevant agreements under seal, but any such request had to comply with the Northern District of California’s local sealing rule. The order did not grant advance permission to seal the agreements.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.