Angeles v. Future Motion, Inc.

Background

On May 4, 2021, the parties notified the court that they had reached an agreement in principle resolving all issues. The opinion does not state what claims Jenisa Angeles asserted or provide the terms of the agreement.

Order

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

The parties could apply to reopen the case within 30 days. Such an application had to show good cause for keeping the case open despite the parties’ settlement; the order stated that a late application or one lacking a showing of good cause could be denied solely on that basis. If the parties wanted the court to retain jurisdiction—the authority to enforce the settlement agreement—they had to submit the agreement and request an order expressly retaining jurisdiction within the same 30-day period.

Class-Action Caption and Effect

The court directed the clerk to remove the words “individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated” from Angeles’s name in the caption. Because the parties had not notified the court that they intended to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), the order stated that the dismissal and any settlement were effective only between Angeles and Future Motion, Inc. They did not bind absent putative class members.

Disposition

The court dismissed the case with prejudice and without costs, terminated the open motions, closed the case, and entered the caption amendment described above.