Paguada v. Unequal Technologies Company
- Ronnie Abrams
- 1:21-cv-00360
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Paguada v. Unequal Technologies Company, Judge Abrams discontinued the settled-in-principle case without prejudice to timely restoration.
Josue Paguada, the people identified as others similarly situated, and Unequal Technologies Company; the action was discontinued subject to the court’s 30-day restoration and settlement-enforcement conditions.
What happened
In Paguada v. Unequal Technologies Company, Josue Paguada brought the action on behalf of himself and others similarly situated. The court was told that the case had been settled in principle and that the parties were finalizing an agreement.
The court discontinued the action without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring it to the court’s docket. A request to reopen had to be filed within 30 days. The court also explained that any request for it to keep authority to enforce a settlement required the settlement terms to be made public and approved by the court within that period.
Judge Ronnie Abrams entered the order on April 20, 2021. The opinion did not decide the underlying claims or approve the settlement agreement.
The detailed version
- Paguada v. Unequal Technologies Company · No. 1:21-cv-00360
- Ronnie Abrams
- Apr. 20, 2021
Background
Josue Paguada sued Unequal Technologies Company on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated. The court was informed that the case had been settled in principle and that the parties were finalizing a settlement agreement.
The opinion does not identify the underlying claims or provide the settlement’s terms.
Ruling
The court ordered that the action be discontinued without costs to any party and without prejudice to restoring the action to the court’s docket if an application to restore it was made within 30 days. The court stated that an application to reopen filed after that period might be denied solely because it was late.
The court also stated that, if the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—that is, authority—to enforce the settlement agreement, the agreement’s terms had to be placed on the public record and approved by the court within the same 30-day period. The order did not approve the settlement or decide the merits of the underlying dispute.
Effect
The case was discontinued based on the reported settlement in principle, subject to the stated 30-day procedure for restoration or reopening. Judge Ronnie Abrams signed the order.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.