Super Micro Computer, Inc. v. PCPC Direct, Ltd.
- Nathanael Cousins
- 5:20-cv-06648
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Super Micro Computer v. PCPC Direct, Judge Cousins dismissed all claims with prejudice after settlement and retained jurisdiction to enforce the agreement.
Super Micro Computer, Inc. and PCPC Direct, Ltd.; the case was dismissed with prejudice, while the court retained jurisdiction over their settlement agreement until October 15, 2023.
What happened
Super Micro Computer, Inc. and PCPC Direct, Ltd. told the court they had settled the case. Their agreement required performance over time and included a provision allowing Super Micro to seek a stipulated judgment if PCPC Direct defaulted on certain terms.
The court dismissed the action and all claims with prejudice, meaning the claims were ended and could not be brought again in this case. It administratively closed the case, vacated all scheduled dates, and allowed either party to seek reopening by October 2, 2023.
Judge Cousins ordered that the court retain jurisdiction over the case until October 15, 2023, to address the settlement agreement and the stipulated-judgment provision.
The detailed version
- Super Micro Computer, Inc. v. PCPC Direct, Ltd. · No. 5:20-cv-06648
- Nathanael Cousins
- Apr. 28, 2021
Background
The parties jointly stipulated that they had reached a settlement. The settlement required performance over time and included a stipulation for entry of judgment, allowing Super Micro to seek a stipulated judgment if PCPC Direct defaulted on specified settlement terms.
Order
Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, the court ordered that the action and all claims asserted in it were dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk was directed to administratively close the case, and all scheduled dates were vacated. The order permitted either party to move to reopen the case if the motion was filed by October 2, 2023.
Retained Jurisdiction
The court retained jurisdiction over the case until October 15, 2023. The retained jurisdiction concerned the parties’ settlement agreement and enforcement of the stipulation for entry of judgment. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or resolve their merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.