Pappas v. Mypizza Technologies, Inc.

Background

On April 14, 2021, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The plaintiff was identified as George Pappas, individually and as the representative of a proposed class of similarly situated persons. The defendant was Mypizza Technologies, Inc.

Rulings

The court canceled all previously scheduled conferences and other deadlines. It dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, including attorneys’ fees, to either party. The clerk was directed to terminate all open motions and close the case.

The parties were permitted to apply to reopen the case within 30 days. The order states that such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open in light of the settlement. A request filed after 30 days or without a showing of good cause could be denied on that basis alone.

If the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, continuing authority to enforce the settlement agreement—they had to submit the settlement agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Effect on the Proposed Class

The court directed the clerk to remove the language referring to the plaintiff as acting individually and on behalf of others similarly situated. The court stated that the parties had not notified it that they intended to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), which governs certain class settlements and dismissals. Therefore, the dismissal and any settlement were operative only between the individual plaintiff and the defendant and did not bind absent putative class members.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, terminated the open motions, closed the case, and limited the effect of the dismissal and any settlement to the named plaintiff and defendant.